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  
domerryan

Issue 1: What Happened At Ghadir Khumm?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

As-salaamu alay-kum, Greetings to all of you again, and blessings from The One True God in whom we all trust, Christian and Muslim alike.

And thus I, a Christian, begin formally to engage in the discussion between you; Sunni and Shia. It would seem from the outset that a primary point of discussion must be with Muhammad's own desire, while he was alive, as to whom should succeed him as leader of the Muslim community. One historical event that I feel speaks strongly to Muhammad's wishes occured at Ghadir Khumm.

I quote from Ibn Hanbal (a Sunni):

"We were with the Apostle of God on his journey and we stopped at Ghadir Khumm. We performed the obligatory prayer together and a place was swept for the Apostle under two trees amd he performed the midday prayer. And then he took Ali by the hand and said to the people:

'Do you not acknowledge that I have a greater claim on each of the believers than they have on themselves?'

And they replied, 'Yes!' And he took Ali's hand and said:

'Of whomsoever I am Lord, then Ali is also his Lord. O God! Be thou the supporter of whoever supports Ali

and the enemy of whoever opposes him.'

And Umar met him (Ali) after this and said to him: 'Congratulations, O son of Abu Talib! Now morning amd evening you are the master of every believing man and woman!'" (Musnad Vol. 4, p. 281)

My questions, with respect, to Sunnis is this:

1. Do you accept the historicity of this event?

2. What do you think Muhammad was trying to accomplish by this act?

3. How do you interpret Muhammad's use of the term "Lord" (Mawla) in this context?

4. What do you think Umar meant by his declaration?

Thank You,

Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As-salaamu alay-kum, Greetings to all of you again, and blessings from The One True God in whom we all trust, Christian and Muslim alike.

And thus I, a Christian, begin formally to engage in the discussion between you; Sunni and Shia. It would seem from the outset that a primary point of discussion must be with Muhammad's own desire, while he was alive, as to whom should succeed him as leader of the Muslim community. One historical event that I feel speaks strongly to Muhammad's wishes occured at Ghadir Khumm.

I quote from Ibn Hanbal (a Sunni):

"We were with the Apostle of God on his journey and we stopped at Ghadir Khumm. We performed the obligatory prayer together and a place was swept for the Apostle under two trees amd he performed the midday prayer. And then he took Ali by the hand and said to the people:

'Do you not acknowledge that I have a greater claim on each of the believers than they have on themselves?'

And they replied, 'Yes!' And he took Ali's hand and said:

'Of whomsoever I am Lord, then Ali is also his Lord. O God! Be thou the supporter of whoever supports Ali

and the enemy of whoever opposes him.'

And Umar met him (Ali) after this and said to him: 'Congratulations, O son of Abu Talib! Now morning amd evening you are the master of every believing man and woman!'" (Musnad Vol. 4, p. 281)

My questions, with respect, to Sunnis is this:

1. Do you accept the historicity of this event?

2. What do you think Muhammad was trying to accomplish by this act?

3. How do you interpret Muhammad's use of the term "Lord" (Mawla) in this context?

4. What do you think Umar meant by his declaration?

Thank You,

Ryan

We believe in the Hadith except that this is a mistranslation.

'Of whomsoever I am Lord, then Ali is also his Lord. O God! Be thou the supporter of whoever supports Ali

and the enemy of whoever opposes him.'

The correct translation would be Guardian or Protector, not "Lord". The Arabic word used is Mawla which as I said means Guardian or Protector but does not mean CALIPH or RULER. So this Hadith has nothing to do with Caliphate but is to do with the status of Ali (ra) as the Protector of the Ummah. The Prophet (pbuh) gave the title "Mawla" or protector to others too including some tribes saying one tribe is "Mawla" of another.

In the Qur'an Allah also says that Gabriel/Jabraeel is the Mawla of Prophet Mohammad (saw), that doesn't mean that he was the "Caliph" of the Prophet (pbuh). In fact the status of Prophet Mohammad (saw) is greater than that of Gabriel so Mawla or Protector doesnt neccissarily even mean that someone is better.

ps. Are you really "Christian"??hmmm.... you even speak Arabic (Mawla...!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As-salaamu alay-kum, Greetings to all of you again, and blessings from The One True God in whom we all trust, Christian and Muslim alike.

And thus I, a Christian, begin formally to engage in the discussion between you; Sunni and Shia. It would seem from the outset that a primary point of discussion must be with Muhammad's own desire, while he was alive, as to whom should succeed him as leader of the Muslim community. One historical event that I feel speaks strongly to Muhammad's wishes occured at Ghadir Khumm.

I quote from Ibn Hanbal (a Sunni):

"We were with the Apostle of God on his journey and we stopped at Ghadir Khumm. We performed the obligatory prayer together and a place was swept for the Apostle under two trees amd he performed the midday prayer. And then he took Ali by the hand and said to the people:

'Do you not acknowledge that I have a greater claim on each of the believers than they have on themselves?'

And they replied, 'Yes!' And he took Ali's hand and said:

'Of whomsoever I am Lord, then Ali is also his Lord. O God! Be thou the supporter of whoever supports Ali

and the enemy of whoever opposes him.'

And Umar met him (Ali) after this and said to him: 'Congratulations, O son of Abu Talib! Now morning amd evening you are the master of every believing man and woman!'" (Musnad Vol. 4, p. 281)

My questions, with respect, to Sunnis is this:

1. Do you accept the historicity of this event?

2. What do you think Muhammad was trying to accomplish by this act?

3. How do you interpret Muhammad's use of the term "Lord" (Mawla) in this context?

4. What do you think Umar meant by his declaration?

Thank You,

Ryan

Nice to meet you again Ryan, cant believe ive missed this thread.

To answer your questions:

1. accepted historical event

2. God Knows

3. Guardian/Protector

4. Only he knows

Now my question:

Does this categorically prove that Muhammed (SAW) wanted Ali (as) to be the Caliph ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is for Sunnis to answer, but this is to "Muslim Sunni", as I feel he has left out the entire point of this event in his post, which is expected from the Ahlul'sunnah.

I'm afraid you are trying to deceive our Christian brother, may Allah reward him for his efforts in searching through our Deen to broaden his horizons.

Your scholars seem to agree that the word Mawla means "friend" here, which you have admitted is not the case. This exposes the fact that there is something that your scholars are trying very deliberately to hide. The word "kufar" means to hide the truth.

What is a Khalifa in Islam, my friend? A Khalifa is a guide who acts by Allah's will. Please prove your point through the Qur'an and not speculation. The Sunni Caliphs, as you have said, were not the Guardians and Protectors of the Religion of Rasoolullah, so what are you doing by following them and not the Imams of the Ahlul'bayt? Who is greater in status according to this hadith, Abu Bak'r or Mawla Ali ibn Abu Talib?

And the real Hadith clearly shows that Imam Ali was made into the IMAM AND MASTER AND LORD of all the believers. Hence, everyone paid allegiance to him and bore witness that he was the successor of Rasoolullah.

Mawla Ali's status in the Qur'an is apparent in 5:55 and in 3:61 and in many other places. Also, brother, you may or may not know about the two Holy Verses that descended on that day, which I see you have not mentioned:

(before the appointment of Imam Ali):

"O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people." (5:67)

(Mawla Ali is appointed):

"This day are those who disbelieve in despair of (ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam." (5:3)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your scholars seem to agree that the word Mawla means "friend" here, which you have admitted is not the case. This exposes the fact that there is something that your scholars are trying very deliberately to hide. The word "kufar" means to hide the truth.

What is a Khalifa in Islam, my friend? A Khalifa is a guide who acts by Allah's will. Please prove your point through the Qur'an and not speculation. The Sunni Caliphs, as you have said, were not the Guardians and Protectors of the Religion of Rasoolullah, so what are you doing by following them and not the Imams of the Ahlul'bayt? Who is greater in status according to this hadith, Abu Bak'r or Mawla Ali ibn Abu Talib?

And the real Hadith clearly shows that Imam Ali was made into the IMAM AND MASTER AND LORD of all the believers. Hence, everyone paid allegiance to him and bore witness that he was the successor of Rasoolullah.

Mawla Ali's status in the Qur'an is apparent in 5:55 and in 3:61 and in many other places. Also, brother, you may or may not know about the two Holy Verses that descended on that day, which I see you have not mentioned:

(before the appointment of Imam Ali):

"O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people." (5:67)

(Mawla Ali is appointed):

"This day are those who disbelieve in despair of (ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam." (5:3)

I dont know of sunni leaders claiming Maula to mean friend. If you have evidence to the contrary then Ill be happy give another reply. As this is not the case the first argument regarding 'kuffar' is flawed.

I think you are mixing Calipha and Mawla here without really differentiating. Calipha/Mawla and thus the rightful leadership has now been argued for over 1400 years, so I highly doubt we are going to resolve this today.

Everyone agrees that Ali (as) is the Malwa of all believers. However to directly start assuming that everyone accepted him and gave allegiance to him as the Caliph there and then I think is slightly taking it out of context. This may be due the the firm shia belief that caliphate was stolen from Ali (as) by Abu BAkr (ra).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont know of sunni leaders claiming Maula to mean friend. If you have evidence to the contrary then Ill be happy give another reply. As this is not the case the first argument regarding 'kuffar' is flawed.

I think you are mixing Calipha and Mawla here without really differentiating. Calipha/Mawla and thus the rightful leadership has now been argued for over 1400 years, so I highly doubt we are going to resolve this today.

Everyone agrees that Ali (as) is the Malwa of all believers. However to directly start assuming that everyone accepted him and gave allegiance to him as the Caliph there and then I think is slightly taking it out of context. This may be due the the firm shia belief that caliphate was stolen from Ali (as) by Abu BAkr (ra).

1. Please explain where the Sunni story of the Prophet telling the bickering soldiers that Imam Ali was their friend came from.

2. The Prophet said: "Do I not have more authority over teh believers than the believers have over themselves? Then, WHOMSOEVER I AM MAWLA OF ALI IS ALSO MAWLA!"

Read it in context. The word Mawla here clearly means "mastership of authority." I'm going to ask you this, and please answer honestly to the best of your ability: What do the Qur'anic verses revealed on that day (5:67 and 5:3) mean to you?

3. No, Sunnis agree to this on the surface level, but do not act on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are two versions of this Hadith, one says MAWLA and the other says WALI.

Now the word WALI means ALLY or FRIEND, but the other version says MAWLA.

Neither Mawla nor Wali have anything to do with Caliphate.

But perhaps a few dudes getting together and electing Abu Bak'r while Imam Ali was burying the Prophet is what Khalifate really means to you.

You guys have to start looking into these things without biasing yourselves from the very outset of your search for the truth. Look at the Qur'anic verses revealed on that day and please tell the brother Ryan what they mean.

Edited by mansab.jafri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are two versions of this Hadith, one says MAWLA and the other says WALI.

Now the word WALI means ALLY or FRIEND, but the other version says MAWLA.

Neither Mawla nor Wali have anything to do with Caliphate.

Wali in 5:55 doesn't mean "friend" and "ally". Please show evidence of this.

Until then, you can read the Shia point of view on this verse here:

http://almizan.org/Tafseer/Volume11/11Maida1.asp

Here is the tafsir from almizan by Allamah Tabataba'i on 5:67:

http://almizan.org/Tafseer/Volume11/11Maida2.asp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam) ,

Neither Mawla nor Wali have anything to do with Caliphate
. Brother Muslim Suuni, Please define Caliphate? Does Caliphate has any Islamic Significance? What if any one doesn't accept Hazrat Abubakr, Umar and Usman as the Caliphs? My friend, only Hazart Ali Ibn-e-Abi Talib (as) was the only true and right successor (We call it Imamat and hence Imam Ali (as)) to Prophet Muhammad (SAW), appointed by Prophet Mohammad (SAW) as per Allah (SWT) wish as indicated by brother Mansab.

(before the appointment of Imam Ali):

"O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people." (5:67)

(Mawla Ali is appointed):

"This day are those who disbelieve in despair of (ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam." (5:3)

I would also ask you to explain what Allah (SWT) want prophet Mohammad to reveal in such a way as never heard before any where in Quran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We believe in the Hadith except that this is a mistranslation.

'Of whomsoever I am Lord, then Ali is also his Lord. O God! Be thou the supporter of whoever supports Ali

and the enemy of whoever opposes him.'

The correct translation would be Guardian or Protector, not "Lord". The Arabic word used is Mawla which as I said means Guardian or Protector but does not mean CALIPH or RULER. So this Hadith has nothing to do with Caliphate but is to do with the status of Ali (ra) as the Protector of the Ummah. The Prophet (pbuh) gave the title "Mawla" or protector to others too including some tribes saying one tribe is "Mawla" of another.

In the Qur'an Allah also says that Gabriel/Jabraeel is the Mawla of Prophet Mohammad (saw), that doesn't mean that he was the "Caliph" of the Prophet (pbuh). In fact the status of Prophet Mohammad (saw) is greater than that of Gabriel so Mawla or Protector doesnt neccissarily even mean that someone is better.

ps. Are you really "Christian"??hmmm.... you even speak Arabic (Mawla...!)

Br Sunni salam.

I don't disagree with any word you said.. But:

Why would the prophet pick that day to say what he said about Ali?

Why would he equate himself in this "mawalat with Ali?

Incidently the word mawla can mean "servent" as well

so what does it mean when one man the guardian of the whole umma, or the servent of the whole umma, or the protector of the whole umma?

I Thing the answer lies in an Amercian Saying.. It goe like this my brother " if it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck... it is a duck".:)

salam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Sunni salam.

I don't disagree with any word you said.. But:

Why would the prophet pick that day to say what he said about Ali?

Why would he equate himself in this "mawalat with Ali?

Incidently the word mawla can mean "servent" as well

so what does it mean when one man the guardian of the whole umma, or the servent of the whole umma, or the protector of the whole umma?

I Thing the answer lies in an Amercian Saying.. It goe like this my brother " if it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck... it is a duck".:)

salam

WS

Brother I have noticed one thing regarding the 'line of questioning' taken by certain brothers.

All these 'Why ?' questions asked by the writer are LEADING the reader to only the opinion of the writer. This is often the line taken by FBI agents when they try and 'fit' people up to crimes.

I hope your not trying to fit anything up by asking so much. All it shows is your own confusion.

Yes brother, but americans are mostly stupid, and so they probably dont know what a duck looks like anyways ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wali in 5:55 doesn't mean "friend" and "ally". Please show evidence of this.

Yes it does, why not?

Here is the verse:

Only Allah is your Wali and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow.

Allah is our ALLY/helper. Ally is someone who helps you and you help him, and Allah says in the Qur'an that we should help him (although He doesn need our help) so that He would help us. So what's the problem?

If Wali means CALIPH, then your saying that Allah and His messenger and the believers are all Caliphs???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(Mawla Ali is appointed):

"This day are those who disbelieve in despair of (ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam." (5:3)

If this verse was about the Caliphate of Ali (ra) as you say then it would be very strange that it doesnt say so. Are you saying that the Qur'an is unclear and is trying to hide something? There are so many Muslims and Kafirs and kings whose names and status are mentioned in the Qur'an so why is there no mention of Ali (ra) or his Caliphate or Imamate in this verse?

Also the Shias themselves say that Ali being MAWLA was repeated TWICE or THREE TIMES before this. So this was not anything new but you say this verse meant that something new was going to happen..!!! So obviously this verse is not about Ali's "Imamate".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My questions, with respect, to Sunnis is this:

1. Do you accept the historicity of this event?

2. What do you think Muhammad was trying to accomplish by this act?

3. How do you interpret Muhammad's use of the term "Lord" (Mawla) in this context?

4. What do you think Umar meant by his declaration?

Thank You,

Ryan

This is a fair question but if I can add to point #2 and #3:

the context of his speech says alot about what he was trying to accomplish and serves to further elucidate the interpretation of (mawla).

The very first sentence uttered was a question to which they acknowledged.

'Do you not acknowledge that I have a greater claim on each of the believers than they have on themselves?'

This means that If I was inclined to do something and the messenger (pbuh) asked me not to do it. I would have to give up my inclination because his claim on me is greater than my claim on my own self. This question demonstrates a position of authority, therefore the word Mawla was uttered in the context of authority, not servant.

The question is followed up with the statement "whomever's Mawla I am, Ali is also his mawla"

When answering #2 and #3 please demonstrate how your answer is in keeping with the context of the question

'Do you not acknowledge that I have a greater claim on each of the believers than they have on themselves?'

salaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If this verse was about the Caliphate of Ali (ra) as you say then it would be very strange that it doesnt say so. Are you saying that the Qur'an is unclear and is trying to hide something? There are so many Muslims and Kafirs and kings whose names and status are mentioned in the Qur'an so why is there no mention of Ali (ra) or his Caliphate or Imamate in this verse?

Also the Shias themselves say that Ali being MAWLA was repeated TWICE or THREE TIMES before this. So this was not anything new but you say this verse meant that something new was going to happen..!!! So obviously this verse is not about Ali's "Imamate".

Question 1.

Tell us who else at the time of Prophet (pbuh) appeared more or was referred more in Quran, was it Imam Ali (as), Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman?

Perhaps this will give some insight

Imam Ali (a.s) in the Quran and Sunnah

Question 2

Why did the prophet (pbuh) leave two weighty things when Quran itself was enough? Both go together (sahih hadith).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If this verse was about the Caliphate of Ali (ra) as you say then it would be very strange that it doesnt say so. Are you saying that the Qur'an is unclear and is trying to hide something? There are so many Muslims and Kafirs and kings whose names and status are mentioned in the Qur'an so why is there no mention of Ali (ra) or his Caliphate or Imamate in this verse?

Also the Shias themselves say that Ali being MAWLA was repeated TWICE or THREE TIMES before this. So this was not anything new but you say this verse meant that something new was going to happen..!!! So obviously this verse is not about Ali's "Imamate".

Incorrect allegation. The Qur'an does not mention specifics about the doctrines of our faith. Who cares about the kafirs and munafiqs? Prayer and Hajj are more important than the Imamate of Amir al-Momineen Ali ibn Abu Talib. From where do you get the specifics of these principles? The Prophet, NOT the Qur'an. I think Brother Hassanain Rajabali said it the best and the most beautifully when he said that the only reason the specifics are not mentioned is because we are to look at the Prophet for these things. The Prophet is from where we get the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and the specifics. He is the center of our faith. If we could find everything in the Qur'an, the Prophet wouldn't be necessary, he could've just given us the Kitab and said "here you go, follow it." So please don't give me this bologna about "it's not mentioned in the Qur'an" because I can use that argument and slap you across the face with it 10 times over. I expect more from an intelligent person, and excuse my temper, but it's getting quite absurd when nothing valid is brought to the table to explain these verses.

As for your second point... Yes, this was mentioned from the very day Rasoolullah publicly declared his Nabuwwat. I can show you references from your books if you would like them. But you find that Mawla Ali was never formally declared the Imam. These were isolated incidences that would not mean anything after the Prophet passed away. But Allah commanded the Prophet to appoint Imam Ali and obtain allegiance for him so that there is no confusion and no way to question the appointment.

Did you read the Tafsir? I can see you didn't.

Just so you know, Sunni scholars admit that the verse 5:55 was revealed to further expose the rank of Amir al-Momineen Ali ibn Abu Talib, so it doesn't make sense that it would mean "friend" or "ally". For what reason, I ask you?

"Muslim Sunni", define the word "Khalifa" through the Qur'an. Not what happened after the Prophet. Let's see what definition we can gather from the Qur'an itself.

Edited by mansab.jafri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And also, there still has been no explanation from the Sunni side about the verses 5:67 and 5:3. Please tell us what they mean, because as Muslims, we all know that each verse means something.

Tell us why in 5:67, there is a great warning from Allah saying "if you do not do it, you have not delivered the risalah":

"O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people." (5:67)

1) What was the revelation?

2) Why is this revelation so important that it would jeopardize the entire Message of Islam?

3) And why is there comfort from Allah telling Rasoolullah basically that "Allah will protect you from the people"? Who are these people that Allah is going to have to protect Rasoolullah from, and why was this protection necessary? We find this protection wasn't promised earlier in the Prophethood of Rasoolullah, in the Battles especially, so what was so dangerous right now?

4) Who are the unbelieving people mentioned at the end? What were they going to disbelieve in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would seem from the outset that a primary point of discussion must be with Muhammad's own desire, while he was alive, as to whom should succeed him as leader of the Muslim community. One historical event that I feel speaks strongly to Muhammad's wishes occured at Ghadir Khumm.

My brother Ryan, we as Muslims believe that Rasoolullah only conveyed what Allah revealed:

"Your companion does not err, nor does he go astray;

Nor does he speak out of desire.

It is naught but revelation that is revealed;" (53:2-4)

In case you were wondering :)

- Syed Mansab Ali Jafri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neither Mawla nor Wali have anything to do with Caliphate.

The words of your beloved one is suffice to nullify your conjecture.

ÝÊæÝì Çááå äÈíå þ þÕáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã þ þÝÞÇá þ þÃÈæ ÈßÑ þ þÃäÇ æáí ÑÓæá Çááå þ þÕáì Çááå

Úáíå æÓáã þ þÝÞÈÖåÇ ÝÚãá ÈãÇ Úãá Èå ÑÓæá Çááå þ þÕáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã þ þËã ÊæÝì Çááå þ þÃÈÇ ÈßÑ þ þÝÞáÊ ÃäÇ æáí æáí ÑÓæá Çááå þ þÕáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã þ þÝÞÈÖÊåÇ ÓäÊíä ÃÚãá ÝíåÇ ãÇ Úãá ÑÓæá Çááå þ þÕáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã þ þæÃÈæ ÈßÑ

.....Now I beseech you by Allah, do you know all that?' They said, 'Yes.' 'Umar then said to 'Ali and 'Abbas, 'I beseech you by Allah, do you know that?' Both of them said, 'Yes.' 'Umar added, 'And when the Prophet died, Abu Bakr said, ' I am the successor [WALI] of Allah's Apostle, and took charge of that property and managed it in the same way as Allah's Apostle did. .....

Sahih Bukhari, volume 8 Hadith 720

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice to meet you again Ryan, cant believe ive missed this thread.

To answer your questions:

1. accepted historical event

2. God Knows

3. Guardian/Protector

4. Only he knows

Now my question:

Does this categorically prove that Muhammed (SAW) wanted Ali to be the Caliph ?

What is your opinion about Mauwia appointing Yazid after him?

The fact is that he named Yazid. Although, there was a group who opposed and asked him to follow any one of this:

1) Name no successor as Prophet (pbuh) did ( as they believed it).

2) Choose someone out of family like 1st caliph did.

3) Appoint a committe as 2nd Caliph did.

He followed none ( contradicting the agreement: that all claims to the caliphate from his side/ family would come to an end after his death), what do you think the reason behind it to be, why he named Yazid?

What do you think of those people who followed Samri when Moses/ Musa (as) went to Sinai, although Moses (as) declared Aaron/ Haron (as) to be followed in his place, and do you know where Samri led this people who followed him?

Didn't Prophet (pbuh) said: Ali is to me as Aaron was to Moses.

Shouldn't we follow Aaron of the time ( Ali) instead of Samri of the time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WS

Brother I have noticed one thing regarding the 'line of questioning' taken by certain brothers.

All these 'Why ?' questions asked by the writer are LEADING the reader to only the opinion of the writer. This is often the line taken by FBI agents when they try and 'fit' people up to crimes.

I hope your not trying to fit anything up by asking so much. All it shows is your own confusion.

Yes brother, but americans are mostly stupid, and so they probably dont know what a duck looks like anyways ;)

Your are quite right my brother. The purpose of the questions is to make a point and I really do hope you would tackle them at least.

As for the American being stupid,, well I don't know, it is irrelevent anyway. The prophet said " take wisdom from even the fools".

salam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL I guess generalizing in a disgusting manner and claiming that Americans are mostly "stupid" is far more important than answering the points posed. Please....

I am still waiting for "Muslim Sunni" or "al_islam" to answer these posts:

And also, there still has been no explanation from the Sunni side about the verses 5:67 and 5:3. Please tell us what they mean, because as Muslims, we all know that each verse means something.

Tell us why in 5:67, there is a great warning from Allah saying "if you do not do it, you have not delivered the risalah":

"O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people." (5:67)

1) What was the revelation?

2) Why is this revelation so important that it would jeopardize the entire Message of Islam?

3) And why is there comfort from Allah telling Rasoolullah basically that "Allah will protect you from the people"? Who are these people that Allah is going to have to protect Rasoolullah from, and why was this protection necessary? We find this protection wasn't promised earlier in the Prophethood of Rasoolullah, in the Battles especially, so what was so dangerous right now?

4) Who are the unbelieving people mentioned at the end? What were they going to disbelieve in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AI's taking an enforced vacay for making threatening sounding statements (went a little far to just dismiss) toward other members... he'll be back in awhile

Edited by Aliya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AI's taking an enforced vacay for making threatening sounding statements (went a little far to just dismiss) toward other members... he'll be back in awhile

LOL I can't wait for brother "Al" to re-appear, thanks for the info Sis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice that no one cares to answer the post?

LOL I guess generalizing in a disgusting manner and claiming that Americans are mostly "stupid" is far more important than answering the points posed. Please....

I am still waiting for "Muslim Sunni" or "al_islam" to answer these posts:

QUOTE

And also, there still has been no explanation from the Sunni side about the verses 5:67 and 5:3. Please tell us what they mean, because as Muslims, we all know that each verse means something.

Tell us why in 5:67, there is a great warning from Allah saying "if you do not do it, you have not delivered the risalah":

"O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people." (5:67)

1) What was the revelation?

2) Why is this revelation so important that it would jeopardize the entire Message of Islam?

3) And why is there comfort from Allah telling Rasoolullah basically that "Allah will protect you from the people"? Who are these people that Allah is going to have to protect Rasoolullah from, and why was this protection necessary? We find this protection wasn't promised earlier in the Prophethood of Rasoolullah, in the Battles especially, so what was so dangerous right now?

4) Who are the unbelieving people mentioned at the end? What were they going to disbelieve in?

:) I kindly ask brothers Muslim Sunni and al_islam to enlighten us on this from their point of view, if this is not so much to ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the last revalation came at the conclusion of the speech at the farewell hajj..

1)Quran

2)self explanatory

3)The Polytheists who would do and did everything they could to stop The Prophet (pbuh) from succedin

4)see above

oh yea

what was the shii reasoning as to why this "announcemnt" of succesion wasnt made in mecca?

to add

were the ansari present as well?

Edited by enforcrr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OHHH PLEASE, ENFORCRR, WHAT KIND OF BOLOGNA ARE YOU POSTING THESE DAYS? May you be guided.

1)Quran

REPLY:

I did not think that even your fanatical roots and lust for denial would cause you to turn towards blind bigotry like this. LOL look how stupid this sounds:

You think Allah is saying to Rasoolullah... "Deliver the Qur'an, and if you do not deliver it, you have not delivered the message (of Islam)!!" Good one.

Or are you saying that Allah is saying.... "Deliver the RELIGION OF ISLAM, and if you do not deliver it, you have no delivered it." That's ridiculous as well.

This verse is saying "deliver THAT WHICH HAS BEEN SENT DOWN", meaning deliver this new specific order or Islam will be as if it was never delivered. Ayah 5:3 ("This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion;") is proof of this. It's about something specific, the 'cherry on top', if I may put it like that. Your explanation holds about as much water as a barrel with no bottom.

2)self explanatory

REPLY:

No reply as usual. You have to first substantiate your claim to the first point, which cannot be done by Sunnis in any way, shape, or form. This is due to its obscenity and its outrageous absurdity. It's an insult to Islam, and I have taken offense to your allegation.

3)The Polytheists who would do and did everything they could to stop The Prophet (pbuh) from succedin

REPLY:

Astaghfurallah, so the Prophet was fearing the disbelievers when their power had already been wiped out and they had already been defeated in battle numerous times and their fire had died out? Astaghfurallah, did the Prophet have anything to fear about these people? This is almost (though not quite) as absurd as your answer to point 1.

Moreover, the Jews and Christians and all them had already entered treaties with the Prophet. The Prophet had delivered messages to them in much more difficult settings with no fear, so what are you talking about?

4)see above

REPLY:

Yawn. I think your barrel ran out of water a long time ago.

Please don't respond, brother enforcrr, this question was really for al_islam and Muslim Sunni. I feel you are incapable of handling this discussion, as you tend to bring nothing to the table but your own foolish conjectures.

Anyway, I'd like a fresh batch of replies WITH rational philosophical premise, unlike what has been embarrassingly displayed by the brother above. Please answer:

There still has been no explanation from the Sunni side about the verses 5:67 and 5:3. Please tell us what they mean, because as Muslims, we all know that each verse means something.

Tell us why in 5:67, there is a great warning from Allah saying "if you do not do it, you have not delivered the risalah":

"O Messenger! deliver what bas been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people." (5:67)

1) What was the revelation?

2) Why is this revelation so important that it would jeopardize the entire Message of Islam?

3) And why is there comfort from Allah telling Rasoolullah basically that "Allah will protect you from the people"? Who are these people that Allah is going to have to protect Rasoolullah from, and why was this protection necessary? We find this protection wasn't promised earlier in the Prophethood of Rasoolullah, in the Battles especially, so what was so dangerous right now?

4) Who are the unbelieving people mentioned at the end? What were they going to disbelieve in?

Edited by mansab.jafri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1)what is islam without the Quran

nothing..

the protection was for no matter how much the polytheist may detist The Prophet (pbuh) will deliver the message.. quite simple..

new specific order

new? i thought Ali (ra) appointment was as old since the Prophet (pbuh) began his mission

lol

also why is the WARNING in the Quran while the "new order" is related via hadith?

wouldnt it make sence to state the "new order" in the Quran itself?

2) you dont believe that delivering of the Quran was the utmost importance of Islam?

interesting...

3)Again timiing of revlation is different from sunni standpoint and shii view..

sunni view is that the last revealed verse came at the last hajj

4)umm ok

oh yea

what was the shii reasoning as to why this "announcemnt" of succesion wasnt made in mecca?

to add

were the ansari present as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1)what is islam without the Quran

nothing..

the protection was for no matter how much the polytheist may detist The Prophet (pbuh) will deliver the message.. quite simple..

new? i thought Ali (ra) appointment was as old since the Prophet (pbuh) began his mission

lol

also why is the WARNING in the Quran while the "new order" is related via hadith?

wouldnt it make sence to state the "new order" in the Quran itself?

2) you dont believe that delivering of the Quran was the utmost importance of Islam?

interesting...

3)Again timiing of revlation is different from sunni standpoint and shii view..

sunni view is that the last revealed verse came at the last hajj

4)umm ok

oh yea

what was the shii reasoning as to why this "announcemnt" of succesion wasnt made in mecca?

to add

were the ansari present as well?

You're seriously lame, bro. You just repeated the same crock. Let someone else try, someone who actually presents logical arguments AND PROOF.

The Qur'an was almost fully delivered, lol, what are you talking about, this is seriously the lamest argument, and not even your scholars try to argue solely on such an irrational premise. They argue something else as well, and since you don't even know about this, I seriously think you don't know jack about this verse with respect to Tafsir from the Sunni and Shia viewpoints.

LOL Surah Tawba was already laid flat upon the disbelievers, these aren't the disbelievers that Allah is speaking about... come onnnnn stick with it, enforcrr, I know you can do it!! the disbelievers are from amongst the group that the Prophet is about to deliver the message to, just like what is said in this verse: "Surely Allah does not guide the transgressing people." (63:6), meaning that Allah will not guide them in their transgression.

So please brother, tell me what the meaning of the clause: "Allah WILL protect you from the unbelieving people", does this mean that Allah was not protecting the Prophet's safety from Day 1? From what was he going to protect the Prophet from? Was He going to protect the Prophet's life, or was He going to protect the Prophet from the blames of the People suggesting that he has appointed Mawla Ali due to him being closer to him, and then the Rasool will lose his credibility.

Also, you make the argument that this is not a NEW MESSAGE then, if Hazrat Ali had already been appointed... no kidding, but I'm talking about the new order to convey it to the people officially and to appoint him as the successor as a finality.

You surely don't expect me to take these arguments seriously.

Edited by mansab.jafri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol like I said, don't use the childish argument "IT'S NOT EXPLICITLY IN THE QUR'AN!" We get the specifics of the doctrines through Rasoolullah, as he is the pivot-point of the religion. The Qur'an is vague on Salaah and Hajj as well, but we don't see the Sunnis complaining about that. This is a fatal double-standard and you are being a hypocrite.

Edited by mansab.jafri

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...