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

Is it halal to threaten to burn down a house....

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'll tell you what he had in in his mind, the Prophet said " Fatima (as) is part of me; whoever hurts her hurts me " because your masoom imam ( Ali ) angered his wife and decided to marry the daughter

As I said previously, there are other hadiths that go against this narration regarding of the authenticity of the chain. This is because Aslam wasn't around during this incident, so there is room for

Of course it doesn't, but that's not the point here. There are thousands of muslims who have committed grave sins, who are nonetheless still muslims, but their credibility takes a massive blow and th

There is only 1 authentic narration and its present in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah. In this narration the incident where the house of Fatima was threatened with burning is mentioned. However, the order was never carried out. The rest of the narrations are all weak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only 1 authentic narration and its present in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah. In this narration the incident where the house of Fatima was threatened with burning is mentioned. However, the order was never carried out. The rest of the narrations are all weak.

Why the reliance on such narrations then? What do Sunni ulema say of that authentic narration?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since he didn't take action it is seen to be a figure of speech. Also, I remembering listening to a lecture and according to history Umar (ra) burned Saaq bin Waqas' (ra) house when he learned that he is was living house outside of Arabia.

So in your view, as long as it's a figure of speech, it's ok to threaten to burn down a house with the Prophet's (pbuh) daughter in it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

sallam

Thank you my respected brother, I was going to say that!

While Sunni Scholars don't say he actually burned down the house, they (at least some) do accept he threatened to burn down the House. I don't think the topic is about burning down the house. It's about the threat which your scholars don't object to. And more over it was said in a general sense, so would it be right for anyone to do this? Threaten to burn a person's house while people are in it?

wa salam

Edited by Awakened
Link to post
Share on other sites

..i'm just waiting for a sunni to answer that it's allowed politically. just as many sunnis act like taking the blood of Imam Ali politically is halaal.

ask them what they think of Muawiyah and his entourage putting their sword or spear into pages of Quran since he is also said to be a sahaba.

sunnis need to understand that they also do their own version of taqiyyah lol. they hide the iman of certain select sahaba.

Edited by gogiison2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

..i'm just waiting for a sunni to answer that it's allowed politically. just as many sunnis act like taking the blood of Imam Ali politically is halaal.

ask them what they think of Muawiyah and his entourage putting their sword or spear into pages of Quran since he is also said to be a sahaba.

sunnis need to understand that they also do their own version of taqiyyah lol. they hide the iman of certain select sahaba.

taking the blood of imam ali is politcally halal? Before claiming what many sunnis believe can u post up where sunni scholars have said this? Everytime i say what shia views are on certain matters i will bring you either video proof from your scholars or within shia books. So i wait for this response first.

What we think of Muawiyah, well the prophet [pbuh] use him to write some the Quran so he did some good there i guess, fighting against Ali [ra] all great sunni scholars of the past have sided with Ali so he did wrong there... so conclusion - stop playing God and let Allah the fairest of judges decide.

No dont accuse us of taqqiya, a disgusting tactic which was never done do in Islam. You need ot understand that we dont have this concept of infallibility. We are all human, humans do mistake. So if u ask me did a certain sahaba do a mistake.... yes as ALL humans do, however, some are purer

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

While Sunni Scholars don't say he actually burned down the house, they (at least some) do accept he threatened to burn down the House. I don't think the topic is about burning down the house. It's about the threat which your scholars don't object to. And more over it was said in a general sense, so would it be right for anyone to do this? Threaten to burn a person's house while people are in it?

wa salam

Sallam

If your not busy inshallah can you name some scholars :).

Please.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

taking the blood of imam ali is politcally halal? Before claiming what many sunnis believe can u post up where sunni scholars have said this? Everytime i say what shia views are on certain matters i will bring you either video proof from your scholars or within shia books. So i wait for this response first.

What we think of Muawiyah, well the prophet [pbuh] use him to write some the Quran so he did some good there i guess, fighting against Ali [ra] all great sunni scholars of the past have sided with Ali so he did wrong there... so conclusion - stop playing God and let Allah the fairest of judges decide.

No dont accuse us of taqqiya, a disgusting tactic which was never done do in Islam. You need ot understand that we dont have this concept of infallibility. We are all human, humans do mistake. So if u ask me did a certain sahaba do a mistake.... yes as ALL humans do, however, some are purer

some scholars like to play with wordings so they won't say it blatantly because they'll lose followers. but sometimes when you let others paint a picture, you don't need them to tell you what it is, sometime you know what it is that they're implying. not saying that this is the case but sunnism started with dhulm in the heart of it's sect. i don't want to get to into this because these are basics of islam that we all should know iA. if one tries to use aql you say he's playing God. it doesn't work that way in islam.

as for taqiyyah check Quran 40:28. also check my blog and answer me what you'd like to call Prophet Ibrahim? alhumdulillah the sunni stance is very weak and is easily proven with Quran and ahadith of both sunni and shia books. i advise to avoid sins and iA you'll see things more clearly.

EDIT: i don't want to derail this thread and take it off topic so i rather not do a general debate here.

Edited by gogiison2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

some scholars like to play with wordings so they won't say it blatantly because they'll lose followers. but sometimes when you let others paint a picture, you don't need them to tell you what it is, sometime you know what it is that they're implying. not saying that this is the case but sunnism started with dhulm in the heart of it's sect. i don't want to get to into this because these are basics of islam that we all should know iA. if one tries to use aql you say he's playing God. it doesn't work that way in islam.

as for taqiyyah check Quran 40:28. also check my blog and answer me what you'd like to call Prophet Ibrahim? alhumdulillah the sunni stance is very weak and is easily proven with Quran and ahadith of both sunni and shia books. i advise to avoid sins and iA you'll see things more clearly.

EDIT: i don't want to derail this thread and take it off topic so i rather not do a general debate here.

Nope no need for a debate as you have failed to back up what you said. Again i ask for evidence that sunni scholars did not side with Ali [ra] in the wars + say that killing him was halal. If it can't be provided, then repent from trying to cause disunity among Muslims.

Yes of course you can lie to save your life, we know that. You said that we do taqqiya of our religion. Since we are not in any danger of being killed and so u associated a lie which isnt life-saving or preventing a catastrophe, as taqqiyah, then this disgusting practice is not part of Islam. If taqqiya to you is only lying in essential situations such as life and death, then why did you associate sunnis doing taqqiya in hiding some facts about history... illogical

No, using aql and playing God is not the same thing. You're judging people badly whom the prophet [saw] liked. So either you received some inspiration to suggest that they are actually bad or ur trying to disunite Muslims - either way let God judge.

Back to the topic, i actually have a document with references as to the sunni view on what happened in this incident. If anyone is serious about it i can send it. Its pretty lengthy so i dont want to just cut and paste it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope no need for a debate as you have failed to back up what you said. Again i ask for evidence that sunni scholars did not side with Ali [ra] in the wars + say that killing him was halal. If it can't be provided, then repent from trying to cause disunity among Muslims.

Yes of course you can lie to save your life, we know that. You said that we do taqqiya of our religion. Since we are not in any danger of being killed and so u associated a lie which isnt life-saving or preventing a catastrophe, as taqqiyah, then this disgusting practice is not part of Islam. If taqqiya to you is only lying in essential situations such as life and death, then why did you associate sunnis doing taqqiya in hiding some facts about history... illogical

No, using aql and playing God is not the same thing. You're judging people badly whom the prophet [saw] liked. So either you received some inspiration to suggest that they are actually bad or ur trying to disunite Muslims - either way let God judge.

Back to the topic, i actually have a document with references as to the sunni view on what happened in this incident. If anyone is serious about it i can send it. Its pretty lengthy so i dont want to just cut and paste it

Bismillah,

as i said before, majority of scholars will not say it blatantly but you see the way they talk on certain issues such as yazid vs. Imam Husayn or Muawiyah vs. Imam Ali. from this, one can see how their brain works. no need for me to bring forward their writings, these things are very well known. and how am i causing disunity? when you guys have in your 'sahih' books that masoomeen supposedly did contrary to Quran and you're telling me i'm trying to cause disunity or contention. i don't think so. it's pretty vague how one can say the Prophet liked 'them.' do you think he liked 'them' when they fought Imam Ali or Imam Husayn? and as for taqiyaah, we're almost always looking out for the best interest of our lives when doing so. i think you're forgetting how the evil minded try to persecute the truthful ones. i think if the evil minded were peaceful, there may've been no need for taqiyaah.

i participated in a thread on sunniforum.com a while back. i'll paste the link below. iA you can read up on how the fellow sunni brethren tried to reply. if you want to add to it, make a part 2 of the thread since they closed that specific thread. please do so on the forum of your choice and iA you'll find me there to answer as well with competence. i'll try not to reply on this thread from this point on since it's turning in a different direction. my posts start from post#33. i rather have you make a thread on a sunni forum since you'll have more assistance iA.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=39885&page=4

Edited by gogiison2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Whoever denies this incident is just a kid, no offense.

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بِشْرٍ ، حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللهِ بْنُ عُمَرَ ، حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدُ بْنُ أَسْلَمَ ، عْن أَبِيهِ أَسْلَمَ ؛ أَنَّهُ حِينَ بُويِعَ لأَبِي بَكْرٍ بَعْدَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ، كَانَ عَلِيٌّ وَالزُّبَيْرُ يَدْخُلاَنِ عَلَى فَاطِمَةَ بِنْتِ رَسُولِ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ، فَيُشَاوِرُونَهَا وَيَرْتَجِعُونَ فِي أَمْرِهِمْ ، فَلَمَّا بَلَغَ ذَلِكَ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ خَرَجَ حَتَّى دَخَلَ عَلَى فَاطِمَةَ ، فَقَالَ : يَا بِنْتَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وَاللهِ مَا مِنْ الْخَلْقِ أَحَدٌ أَحَبَّ إِلَيْنَا مِنْ أَبِيك ، وَمَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ أَحَبَّ إِلَيْنَا بَعْدَ أَبِيك مِنْك ، وَأَيْمُ اللهِ ، مَا ذَاكَ بِمَانِعِيَّ إِنَ اجْتَمَعَ هَؤُلاَءِ النَّفَرُ عِنْدَكِ ، أَنْ آمُرَ بِهِمْ أَنْ يُحَرَّقَ عَلَيْهِمَ الْبَيْتُ.

قَالَ : فَلَمَّا خَرَجَ عُمَرُ جَاؤُوهَا ، فَقَالَتْ : تَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّ عُمَرَ قَدْ جَاءَنِي ، وَقَدْ حَلَفَ بِاللهِ لَئِنْ عُدْتُمْ لَيُحَرِّقَنَّ عَلَيْكُمَ الْبَيْتَ ، وَأَيْمُ اللهِ ، لَيَمْضِيَنَّ لِمَا حَلَفَ عَلَيْهِ ، فَانْصَرِفُوا رَاشِدِينَ ، فَرُوْا رَأْيَكُمْ ، وَلاَ تَرْجِعُوا إِلَيَّ ، فَانْصَرَفُوا عنها ، فَلَمْ يَرْجِعُوا إِلَيْهَا ، حَتَّى بَايَعُوا لأَبِي بَكْرٍ

This is from the Musannaf if ibn Abi Shayba. The reference I have in my version (which I downloaded from almeshkat.net) is: 14/567, hadith 38200. It is reliable.

What you can conclude from this is that 'Umar is out of his mind, threatening to harm the greatest of women, the daughter of the Rasoolullah (as). And yet, it is still claimed that everyone was just and 'aadil and righteous in their conduct. I beg to differ. 'Umar clearly suffered from psychotic problems. I just don't think he was normal in the head. And if he was normal, then he had serious issues with Akhlaaq and how to act like a human being. Not to mention that this event shows that there was absolutely no Ijma' for the Khilafate of Abu Bak'r which is so often claimed by Sunnis. I sometimes become very angry when I read this, and I cannot handle translating it because I will be enraged for the rest of the evening. Someone else can do it.

- Mansab

Edited by mansab.jafri
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Sallamun Alaykum

regarding a threat to burn the people from ahlul kissa that were purified a thorough purifying then it is haram indeed no question about it.

concerning threatening to burn a house which has a pregnant woman and others inside then any aqil person would say ofcourse this is haram there is only one ecxeption i can think of and that is if the people in the house were bad people but where not even there.

brother u have to understand they have reached to a point where they split religion with worldly issues and they decide what is worldly and what is religion when in truth if u read the holy Quran and the hadiths u will see they are one and the same there is no such thing as a split between world and religion Islam is not a religion it is a deen a way of life in every action it is regarded as deen every fibre or atoms weight is judged and considered part of your deen how u act what u do is part of your deen brother these people in order to defend the status of some of the companions they find excuses like "he made a judgment and failed" or "he hated Imam Ali (as) but he hated him not bcz of his religion" and some more strange excuses which no respected intellectual person would accept they did all this so they could make these companiones infallible from the hell fire even if he kills another companion and sleeps with his wife on the same night they will just say it was a firna and lets forget about it may Allah (AW) be please with them all whatever they did bcz as u know they are infallible from the hellfire from a narrative perspective in that their end will be heaven.

what has happened after this is that they are unable to disern truth from falsehood a person like aroor the liar comes and lies as far as i could see from a few episodes more than 15 lies and others also this argument for the sahaba is also given to their scholars "they made a judgement and they failed" so what he made a mistake in accusing shia of something they dont beleive our scholars make mistakes its normal u dont know if he meant it however brother the shia school of thought is diffarant in that every person is on trial if he killed or fornicated or lied or hated people despite them being good people then we dont take our riligion from them the individual must be trustworthy as a human to get corect information from him on any issue so brother i recommend u thank Allah (AW) that u chose the shia path and study it trust me they say Allah (AW) is pleased with the killer and the killed and u want to ask these people if a threat is haram when they have reached to this kind of level?

ws wr wb

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

What you can conclude from this is that 'Umar is out of his mind, threatening to harm the greatest of women, the daughter of the Rasoolullah (as). And yet, it is still claimed that everyone was just and 'aadil and righteous in their conduct. I beg to differ. 'Umar clearly suffered from psychotic problems. I just don't think he was normal in the head. And if he was normal, then he had serious issues with Akhlaaq and how to act like a human being. Not to mention that this event shows that there was absolutely no Ijma' for the Khilafate of Abu Bak'r which is so often claimed by Sunnis. I sometimes become very angry when I read this, and I cannot handle translating it because I will be enraged for the rest of the evening. Someone else can do it.

- Mansab

I have found Umar to be a violent man and an extremist. And before a Sunni accuses me of "being blinded by Shi'a propaganda" hearing narratives about his behavior from Sunnis has always disturbed me even before I had any idea what the Shi'a opinion on him was. How many times did he seek permission from the Prophet (saws) to decapitate a sahaba for some small offence, but the Prophet (saws) forbid him? It's not hard to imagine how far he would go when there was no Prophet to forbid him. And with such characteristics being loved and adored throughout the Muslim Ummah, its not hard to see who the terrorists and dictators the Ummah is plagued with really take their religion from...

Link to post
Share on other sites
What you can conclude from this is that 'Umar is out of his mind, threatening to harm the greatest of women, the daughter of the Rasoolullah (as). And yet, it is still claimed that everyone was just and 'aadil and righteous in their conduct. I beg to differ. 'Umar clearly suffered from psychotic problems. I just don't think he was normal in the head. And if he was normal, then he had serious issues with Akhlaaq and how to act like a human being.

Ãä ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã ÞÇá : æÇáÐí äÝÓí ÈíÏå ¡ áÞÏ åããÊ Ãä ÂãÑ ÈÍØÈ ÝíÍØÈ ¡ Ëã ÂãÑ ÈÇáÕáÇÉ ÝíÄÐä áåÇ ¡ Ëã ÂãÑ ÑÌáÇ ÝíÄã ÇáäÇÓ ¡ Ëã ÃÎÇáÝ Åáì ÑÌÇá ÝÃÍÑÞ Úáíåã ÈíæÊåã ¡ æÇáÐí äÝÓí ÈíÏå ¡ áæ íÚáã ÃÍÏåã : Ãäå íÌÏ ÚÑÞÇ ÓãíäÇ ¡ Ãæ ãÑãÇÊíä ÍÓäÊíä áÔåÏ ÇáÚÔÇÁ .

Authenticated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

While Sunni Scholars don't say he actually burned down the house, they (at least some) do accept he threatened to burn down the House. I don't think the topic is about burning down the house. It's about the threat which your scholars don't object to. And more over it was said in a general sense, so would it be right for anyone to do this? Threaten to burn a person's house while people are in it?

wa salam

Abdaal made a good point even if it was a threat , that doesn't make the person mushrik !! Here's the problem Shia do not believe that Umar only threatened but he and his gang did burn down the house of Fatimah !! that makes you wonder where was Ali and his so called " wonders and powers also known as Wilayah takwnniyah" from all of this !! it really looks bad on Ali, letting his wife beat up while he's there watching, the story is hoax and you know its hoax !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and the Prophet (pbuh) also "threatened" to cut the hand of Fatima if she stole:

( ÃãÇ ÈÚÏ ¡ ÝÅäãÇ Ãåáß ÇáäÇÓ ÞÈáßã : Ãäåã ßÇäæÇ ÅÐÇ ÓÑÞ Ýíåã ÇáÔÑíÝ ÊÑßæå ¡ æÅÐÇ ÓÑÞ Ýíåã ÇáÖÚíÝ ÃÞÇãæÇ Úáíå ÇáÍÏ ¡ æÇáÐí äÝÓ ãÍãÏ ÈíÏå ¡ áæ Ãä ÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ãÍãÏ ÓÑÞÊ áÞØÚÊ íÏåÇ )

Authenticated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

I suppose this makes him unjust, ill-mannered, and psychotic too, am I right?

---------

Even the Prophet (pbuh) would be punished by Allah if he were to fabricate against Allah (swt):

69:44 - 47

And if he had invented false sayings concerning Us, We assuredly had taken him by the right hand And then severed his life-artery, And not one of you could have held Us off from him.

This is supported by the view of Al-Tabtaba'ee as well:

æÇáãÚäì: { æáæ ÊÞæøóá ÚáíäÇ } åÐÇ ÇáÑÓæá ÇáßÑíã ÇáÐí ÍãøóáäÇå ÑÓÇáÊäÇ æÃÑÓáäÇå Åáíßã ÈÞÑÂä äÒøóáäÇå ÝíÄÎÐ ÈíÏå Ãæ ÇáãÑÇÏ ÞØÚäÇ ãäå íÏå Çáíãäì Ãæ ÇáãÑÇÏ áÇäÊÞãäÇ ãäå ÈÇáÞæÉ ßãÇ Ýí ÑæÇíÉ ÇáÞãí { Ëã áÞØÚäÇ ãäå ÇáæÊíä } æÞÊáäÇå áÊÞæøõáå ÚáíäÇ { ÝãÇ ãäßã ãä ÃÍÏ Úäå ÍÇÌÒíä } ÊÍÌÈæäå ÚäÇ æÊäÌæäå ãä ÚÞæÈÊäÇ æÅåáÇßäÇ.

æåÐÇ ÊåÏíÏ ááäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã Úáì ÊÞÏíÑ Ãä íÝÊÑí Úáì Çááå ßÐÈÇð æíäÓÈ Åáíå ÔíÆÇð áã íÞáå æåæ ÑÓæá ãä ÚäÏå ÃßÑãå ÈäÈæøÊå æÇÎÊÇÑå áÑÓÇáÊå.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators

(salam)

( ÃãÇ ÈÚÏ ¡ ÝÅäãÇ Ãåáß ÇáäÇÓ ÞÈáßã : Ãäåã ßÇäæÇ ÅÐÇ ÓÑÞ Ýíåã ÇáÔÑíÝ ÊÑßæå ¡ æÅÐÇ ÓÑÞ Ýíåã ÇáÖÚíÝ ÃÞÇãæÇ Úáíå ÇáÍÏ ¡ æÇáÐí äÝÓ ãÍãÏ ÈíÏå ¡ áæ Ãä ÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ãÍãÏ ÓÑÞÊ áÞØÚÊ íÏåÇ )

This hadith and others like it are saying that Muhammed (pbuh) would fulfill the hudud that the shari'ah puts forth on stealing. It applies to everyone, and he's saying he would even apply the 'hadd on Fatima (as) if she had stolen something. Saying that you will fulfill the law, even on your own daughter, is different than threatening to commit a criminal offense. Same applies for the second ayah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
Oh, and the Prophet pbuh.gif also "threatened" to cut the hand of Fatima if she stole:

( ÃãÇ ÈÚÏ ¡ ÝÅäãÇ Ãåáß ÇáäÇÓ ÞÈáßã : Ãäåã ßÇäæÇ ÅÐÇ ÓÑÞ Ýíåã ÇáÔÑíÝ ÊÑßæå ¡ æÅÐÇ ÓÑÞ Ýíåã ÇáÖÚíÝ ÃÞÇãæÇ Úáíå ÇáÍÏ ¡ æÇáÐí äÝÓ ãÍãÏ ÈíÏå ¡ áæ Ãä ÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ãÍãÏ ÓÑÞÊ áÞØÚÊ íÏåÇ )

Authenticated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

I suppose this makes him unjust, ill-mannered, and psychotic too, am I right?

The Prophet (pbuh) stressed the importance of the shari'a there, and it's a huge IF.

What was Umar stressing, other than his own force?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Saying that you will fulfill the law, even on your own daughter, is different than threatening to commit a criminal offense. Same applies for the second ayah.
What was Umar stressing, other than his own force?

Both of you are assuming that Sunni fiqh doesn't condemn the act above. However, there are statements from the Prophet (pbuh) that indicate this like:

ãä ãÇÊ ÈÛíÑ ÅãÇã ãÇÊ ãíÊÉ ÇáÌÇåáíÉ

Al-Saheeh Al-Musanad by Muqbil Al-Wadi'ee (declared Hasan)

.

- ãä äÒÚ íÏÇ ãä ØÇÚÉ Ãæ ÝÇÑÞ ÇáÌãÇÚÉ ãÇÊ ãíÊÉ ÇáÌÇåáíÉ

Musnad Ahmad revised by Ahmed Shakir (declared Authentic)

-

ãä ÑÇóì ãä ÇóãíÑå ÔóíÆÇ ÝóßóÑåå ÝóáúíóÕÈÑ¡ ÝóÇöäøåõ áóíÓ ÇóÍÏ íÝÇÑöÞ ÇáÌãÇÚÉó ÔÈúÑÇ ÝíãõæÊ ÇöáÇø ãÇÊ ãíÊóÉ ÌÇåáíøÉ

Saheeh Al-Bukhari

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think then your accusations of Fatima (as) and Ali (as) has reached the like of accusations against Mariam (as), and similarly is done with the issue of Fadak.

And here some things to think about, if they knew Abu Baker was Siddique and the best, why would they have an issue of his Rulership especially when Quran forbids love of Uool/Power for itself?

If they knew he was capable and would rule by God's book and there was nothing wrong in what he was doing, why would they do this?

It's obvious there stance has forever written the falsehood of Caliphate of Abu Baker and Umar and has forced people to either respect the sanctity of Syedal Nisaa (as) or speak a bad word about her.

And you are saying by those verses Baya is necessary, well what happened to the whole Umma should accept thing? Now Ali (as) and Fatima (as) and their supporters don't count? And where is the proof Majority accepted? IT seemed a very small band of people did and then the people whom were meeting and not accepting, they were trying to enforce them to Baya...

At any rate, this incident at the very least shows Umar is not the 2nd best in the Umma, and if thought deeply about, negates the Caliphate of Abu Baker and Umar.

And it's odd how you guys QUOTE those sayings, don't have an Imam right now, and praise a person whom fought two Leaders of his time (Ali (as) and Hassan (as)).

Edited by Awakened
Link to post
Share on other sites

Abdaal made a good point even if it was a threat , that doesn't make the person mushrik !!

It would definetly show he is not the Saint you guys make him out to be, that is for certain, this would show he lacks the Akhlaaq of Awliya, let alone being the 2nd best of the Umma of Mohammad (pbuh).

Edited by Awakened
Link to post
Share on other sites
I think then your accusations of Fatima (as) and Ali (as) has reached the like of accusations against Mariam (as), and similarly is done with the issue of Fadak.

And here some things to think about, if they knew Abu Baker was Siddique and the best, why would they have an issue of his Rulership especially when Quran forbids love of Uool/Power for itself?

If they knew he was capable and would rule by God's book and there was nothing wrong in what he was doing, why would they do this?

It's obvious there stance has forever written the falsehood of Caliphate of Abu Baker and Umar and has forced people to either respect the sanctity of Syedal Nisaa (as) or speak a bad word about her.

And you are saying by those verses Baya is necessary, well what happened to the whole Umma should accept thing? Now Ali (as) and Fatima (as) and their supporters don't count? And where is the proof Majority accepted? IT seemed a very small band of people did and then the people whom were meeting and not accepting, they were trying to enforce them to Baya...

At any rate, this incident at the very least shows Umar is not the 2nd best in the Umma, and if thought deeply about, negates the Caliphate of Abu Baker and Umar.

And it's odd how you guys QUOTE those sayings, don't have an Imam right now, and praise a person whom fought two Leaders of his time (Ali (as) and Hassan (as)).

I didn't accuse Fatima and Ali of anything. In fact, my opinion is that Ali gave his allegiance to Abu Bakr quite early. I'm just entertaining the idea that this story did happen. =)

I Epically Fail to see a connection to your previous post. @ tales of symphonia

That is because you epically fail to put your Sunni shoes on. Keep in mind that we believe that there was a concensus regarding him being a Caliph. We also don't believe that Ahlul Bayt are infallible. With these given foundations, you should have no trouble connecting the hadiths I have mentioned with the position of Omar. You do know how to read Arabic, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...