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  
igotquestions

Researching About Shia Islam

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Waleykum Salaam,

Good question.

Also, why not a single person mentioned 'Ghadir', even Ali (ra) himself, when Abubakr (ra) was being elected as the first successor of the Prophet (saw)?

If Abu Bakr was meant to be the Khaleefah, why was there need for a shura at Saqeefah? And if there was to be a shura, why were most of the Prophet's most prominent sahaaba not there? Why was the whole process so rushed by 'Umar ? Why did 'Umar use the excuse against the Ansaar that they (ie Abu Bakr and 'Umar et al) had more right to the Khilaafah than the Ansaar because they were Quraysh and therefore more closely related to the Prophet (saw)? If that was the case, then Imam 'Ali (as) had more right to it than anyone else, as he was the companion most closely related to Rasoolullah (saw).

Also, even the majority of the Sunnah don't dispute the event of Ghadeer - they simply dispute the meaning of the word "mawlaa" .

Edited by Abdul Qaim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waleykum Salaam,

Good question.

Also, why not a single person mentioned 'Ghadir', even Ali (ra) himself, when Abubakr (ra) was being elected as the first successor of the Prophet (saw)?

One more question. Why the people of Ansar (may Allah be pleased with them) gathered to appoint a leader, weren't they aware of 'Ghadir where Ali (ra)was appointed'?

If Abu Bakr was meant to be the Khaleefah, why was there need for a shura at Saqeefah? And if there was to be a shura, why were most of the Prophet's most prominent sahaaba not there? Why was the whole process so rushed by 'Umar ? Why did 'Umar use the excuse against the Ansaar that they (ie Abu Bakr and 'Umar et al) had more right to the Khilaafah than the Ansaar because they were Quraysh and therefore more closely related to the Prophet (saw)? If that was the case, then Imam 'Ali (as) had more right to it than anyone else, as he was the companion most closely related to Rasoolullah (saw).

You first need to read the background of what was going on in Saqeefa before asking questions like 'why most prominent Sahaba were not there'?

These links will help you:

1. Saqifah: A Sunni View

2. A Comprehensive Rebuttal of Answering-Ansar’s Article Entitled “Saqifa; the debacle of Islamic Government”

Also, even the majority of the Sunnah don't dispute the event of Ghadeer - they simply dispute the meaning of the word "mawlaa" .

No one denies the incident of Ghadir. We believe the Prophet (saw) didn't appoint Ali (ra) or anyone else in Ghadir.

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more question. Why the people of Ansar (may Allah be pleased with them) gathered to appoint a leader, weren't they aware of 'Ghadir where Ali (ra)was appointed'?

You first need to read the background of what was going on in Saqeefa before asking questions like 'why most prominent Sahaba were not there'?

These links will help you:

1. Saqifah: A Sunni View

2. A Comprehensive Rebuttal of Answering-Ansar’s Article Entitled “Saqifa; the debacle of Islamic Government”

No one denies the incident of Ghadir. We believe the Prophet (saw) didn't appoint Ali (ra) or anyone else in Ghadir.

PLEASE IF YOU CAN ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS....

1- You Sunni followers believe that grand prophet (S.A) did not determine any caliph and put this task (determination of caliph) upon people themselves.

If this action of grand prophet was right and expedient of nation and was a surety to people’s guidance, then it was compulsory for all to obey him because his actions must be example for those who are pious and believe in the last day: Indeed the messenger of Allah is an outstanding exemplar for those who have hope in Allah’s Grace and in the last day and who keep on saying Allah’s remembrance: SURA AL-AHZAB, VERSE 21.

As a result Abu-Bakr’s action who determined caliph was contrary to grand prophet’s Sunnah and resulted in deviation of Ummah.

Also Omar’s action that put the responsibility of caliph determination on six people council was contrary to grand prophet’s Sunnah and Abu-Bakr’s method as well. And if you say Abu-Bakr and Omar’s action was expedient of nation, then we must believe that grand prophet’s action was not correct! (AL-MUNAZIRAT FIL IMAMAT, P. 246, 259 – QISASUL ULAMA, 391 – SHAYKH SADUQ’S DEBATE WITH MALAK RUKNUD DALAH AND MAMUN’S DEBATE WITH SUNNI SCOLARS)

2- The grand prophet would determine one of his companions as his successor when he left Medina just for a couple of days. He determined Ibn Umme Maktum as his successor when he was out in 13 wars like Badr, Ohud, Abva, Suvayq, Zaturriqa, Hajjatul Vida and … Also determined Abu Raham when he was leaving toward Mecca, Hunayn, Kheibar battles and determined Muhammad Ibn Muslimah at Qirqirah battle, Also Namilat Ibn Abdullah in Banil Mustalaq and Uvayf in Hudaybiya battle.

Regarding these, is it logical and rational that grand prophet leave Islamic Nation forever without determining successor? While he ever determined a successor for one day exit from Medina like Ohud war where it was distant just one Mile from Medina, Is it acceptable that grand prophet would determine successor for himself in Khandaq battle where it was beside Medina but did not do it for a long time after himself?

Can you find an instance in the mentioned cases that Grand prophet put that responsibility on the shoulder of people? Or did he consult in this matter with any of Muslims?

3- From one side, you quoting in your tradition books that messenger of Allah said: “All of the prophets owned executors and successors and quoting that Salman Farsi asked messenger of Allah: Each prophet had its own executor and successor, who is yours?” (AL-MUJAMUL KABIR: 221/6, MAJMAUZ ZAVAEID 113/9, FATHUL BARI: 114/8) and from other side you say that grand prophet did not determine anyone as his successor!

Was messenger of Allah an exception between all other divine prophets and was this specification of Grand Prophet? Or did he act contrary to custom of all other prophets? While glorious God has ordered messenger of Allah to obey from their guidance after he mentions the name of great prophets: Those were the ones whom Allah guided, so you too follow their guidance. (AL-ANAAM, Verse 90)

4- You say: honorable messenger of Allah left this nation without determining caliph and successor and passed away. Did messenger of Allah put the responsibility of caliph determination on nation to choose anyone who they admire or consider him expedient as caliph? And did not messenger of Allah say anything about the condition of election and leadership and the qualification of participants’ candidates? Certainly this is not acceptable because honorable messenger of Allah passed away in a status in when Islamic community situated in a worst situation because from one side powerful governments of Rome and Iran was threatening Islamic government and grand prophet persistence to equip Jaysh Osamah is the best instance to prove this matter, and from other side hypocrites, polytheists and Jews were creating problems to Islamic Community everyday.

It is obvious, in this situation if the governor of a community were an ordinary person, he would not leave the community without a successor, then how can wisdom accept that messenger of Allah has left the community without assigning a caliph and successor? While messenger of Allah was the most sympathetic than others toward Muslims who did not refuse any welfare for Muslims, This noble verse from holy Quran is the best reason to prove the matter: [O, People!] there has come to you a messenger from among yourselves, your suffering grieves him, he is full of concern for your guidance and he kind and compassionate to the believers. (AT-TAUBAH, Verse 128)

Besides, believe in such matter is the most contempt against messenger of Allah who encountered Islamic community with the most difficult problem with such decision! Like Dr. Ahmad Amin an Egyptian scientist who says explicitly: “Grand prophet passed away without determining any successor or explains the way and terms of governor determination and encountered Islamic community without a leader and guardian which cause struggle among people and politicians, as a result governor determination is an urgent need in each society to prevent community involving in any chaos!” (FAJRUL ISLAM: 225)

5- Based on quoting by Sahih Moslem: Hafsah reminded Omar to choose somebody as his successor and following that his son Abdullah says to him: if your shepherd leave camels and sheep without supervisor, will you protest him why you caused their destroy? So think of this nation and determine a caliph for them! Because observing the status of this nation is more necessary than status of camels and sheep! (SAHIH MOSLEM 5/6 (1823/3), KITABUL IMARAH, BABUL ISTIKHLAF VA TARAKAH, MOSNAD AHMAD: 47/1, ALMUSANNAF LI ABDIR RAZZAQ: 448/5)

6- Also Ayisha send messages by aid of Abdullah Ibn Omar to Omar: Do not leave Mohammad’s nation without a shepherd and determine a caliph because I fear they get into nuisance! (AL-IMAMAH VAS SIYASAH:42/1 BI TAHQIQ ASH-SHIRI, 28/1 BI TAHQIQ AZ-AIEI)

In the same way, Muaviyah who intended to take fealty for his son Yazid, entered Medina and while conversing with Abdullah Ibn Omar among companions said: I extremely fear to leave prophet’s nation without any shepherd and pass away! (TARIKH TABARI: 226/4, AL-IMAMAH VAS SIYASAH: 206/1 BI TAHQIQ ASH-SHIRI, 159/1 BI TAHQIQ AZ ZINI)

And according to Ibn Sad quotation in Tabaqat, Abdullah Ibn Omar said to his father: if you recall somebody who is your attorney in fields, will you replace somebody for his position? Omar said: Yes! Abdullah asked: If you recall your sheep’s shepherd, will you assign somebody instead of him? He said: Yes! (TABAQAT IBN SAD, VOL.3, P. 343, TARIKH MADINAH DAMISHQ: 435/44)

Isn’t it the biggest insolence against messenger of Allah that he does not think of his nation as much as Ayisha, Hafsa and Muaviyah? And leave them alone without a leader? Was not there anyone to remind messenger of Allah to determine someone as his successor? Or ask him the style and method of caliph determination?

7- Those who say: grand prophet passed away without will; do they know that they are attributing an action contrary to holy Quran and Sunnah to honorable Mohammad? Because holy Quran commands all Muslims to not die without leaving a will: When death approaches any of you [and the symptoms are observed] if he is wealthy and leaves behind some goods he should draw up a will to parents and his close relatives in their favor [or for any charity usage] this a duty upon the pious: AL-BAQARAH, Verse 180

Because the sentence “KUTIBA ALAYKUM (means he should…) shows the importance and necessity of belonging. And from other side messenger of Allah said: “The duty of every Moslem is having a will and every Moslem should not spend three nights of his life unless he put his will beside.”

While Abdullah Ibn Omar says: When I heard this hadith from messenger of Allah, I never slept any night without having will beside me. (SAHIH MOSLEM: 70/5, AVVALU KITABAL VASSIYAH).

Is it acceptable to say that Abdullah was bound to messenger of Allah’s words than grand prophet himself? Is it acceptable to say that Grand prophet say something that he does not act upon that? Glorious God says: Why do you say something which you do not act upon? And this difference between action and promise result in Allah’s wrath: O, you who believe! Why do you say that which you do not do? It causes Allah’s wrath gravely that you say [and promise] something that you do not fulfill: Verses 2&3 of AS-SAF.

And this contradiction was so clear that was protected by some narrators like Talhat Ibn Masraf who tells Abdullah Ibn Ufi said: How grand prophet command people to provide will, while he himself refuses doing it. (SAHIHUL BUKHARI: 186/3, KITABUL JAHAD: 144/5 BABUL MARAZUN NABI MIN KITABAL MUGHAZI: 107/6, BABUL VUSAT BI KITABILLAH)(MOSNAD AHMAD IBN HANBAL: 354/4, FATHUL BARI: 268/5, TUHFATUL AHVAZY: 257/6)

If verses and traditions of will does not denote its necessity, at least it denotes the license of will and it shows making one’s will is a good and acceptable action and it is not becoming of grand prophet to not do it because holy Quran says: Do you enjoin right conduct and piety on the people and forget yourselves? :AL-BAQARAH, Verse 44.

8- Those who say: grand prophet passed away without determining any successor and put the responsibility of caliph determination upon nation’s shoulder, Did grand prophet determine any terms or qualification for somebody who want to take the position of community leadership? And also did he determine the qualification of those who participate as leadership candidate in election?

If he did, which traditions and narrations have been mentioned these qualifications? If grand prophet mentioned these qualification, why none of the operators of Saqifah would have not adduced it?

Furthermore! If selection of Abu-Bakr were based on the terms of Grand Prophet, why Abu-Bakr said: My fealty was an accidental and it took place suddenly and without any thought! And glorious God repelled its evil. (SHARH NAHJUL BALAGHA LI IBN ABIL HADID: 47/6 BI TAHQIQ MUHAMMAD ABULFAZL, ANSABUL ASHRAF LILBILAZERI: 590/1). In the other words, it was an evil action originally but God eliminated its evil. (AN-NAHAYATU FI GHARIBIL HADITH: 467/3)

And also Omar explained the same sentences at the end of his life over pulpit to people and said: If anyone embarks upon such action, he will be sentenced to death. (SHARH NAHJUL BALAGHA LI IBN ABIL HADID: 26/2, SAHIH AL-BUKHARI, VOL. 8, P. 26, KITABAL MUHARIBIN, BAB RAJM AL-HABLI MINAZ ZINA, MOSNAD AHMAD, VOL. 1, P. 55)

Ibn Athir says: an impolitic action is called FILTAH and because of fear of caliphate’s spread matter, they embarked upon Abu-Bakr’s fealty. (AN-NAHAYATU FI GHARIBIL HADITH: 467/3)

I wish someone asked Ibn Athir that what fear of caliphate matter was that? Was it fear of caliphate which messenger of Allah had determined? Or fear of candidature of the same as Abu-Bakr for the position of caliphate?

Spread of caliphate which grand prophet had determined, not only had any fear but also was the Guarantor of nation’s expedient and it was obligatory for all other people to obey grand prophet’s command and do not object: when a matter has been resolved for a believing man or woman by Allah and his messenger, they are not supposed to prefer their own choice about that decision and who ever disobeys Allah and his messenger he is surely involved in an evident astray: AL-AHZAB, Verse 36

Besides, other people’s candidature had no fear because after considering and evaluation, if people didn’t find at the same rank as Abu-Bakr, definitely they would not swear allegiance with him and if he was in the rank as Abu-Bakr, what was the difference between fealty with him or Abu-Bakr?

But if the leadership candidate had higher qualification than Abu-Bakr and was better and expedient than Abu-Bakr to reform community, was not assigning Abu-Bakr an obstacle to society’s expedient?

9- Above all, if really Abu-Bakr’s caliphate was done based on Grand Prophet’s Sunnah and terms, why Omar said: If somebody embarks upon such action, he will be sentenced to death?

10- You say from one side: Grand prophet did not determine anyone as his successor and did not order anyone to assign somebody as his substitution either, but people themselves choose Abu-Bakr as caliph and from other side you say: these were prophet’s successor and caliph and call them caliph of Messenger (Khalifatur Rasul), Isn’t this defaming to Grand Prophet? Which according to successive hadith, any lie against prophet is considered sin! (SAHIH BUKHARI: 36/1, 81/2, 145/4, 118/7, ALMUZUAT: 57/1, SHARH MOSLEM LILNUVI: 68/1) as a result if you claim that grand prophet did not determine any caliph be correct, Rashidin caliphs are not prophet’s caliph.

11- When Grand prophet was ill in bed he ordered: “Bring me inkpot and pen to write you something till you never get astray” why Omar said: the pain has overcome him and Allah’s book (Holy Quran) is enough for us! (SAHIH BOKHARI: 9/7, KITABUL MARZA, BAB QAUL MARIZ QUMU ANNI, 5/137, KITABUL MUGHAZI, BAB MARAZAN NABI (S.A) VA VAFATUH, SAHIH MOSLEM, FI AKHAR KITABUL VASSIYAH, VOL. 5, P.76) or they said: messenger of Allah is raving!! : It is a grievous thing that issues from their mouths as a saying what they say is nothing but falsehood!: AL-KAHF, Verse 5. And this issue was so painful that when Ibn Abbas remembered it, his tears rolled down his face like beads of pearls. (SAHIH MOSLEM, VOL.1, P. 76, SAHIH BUKHARI: 34/1)

There are some questions about this hadith which has been mentioned in Sahih Bukhari and Moslem and other Sahih books:

1- Are not the words of Omar contrary to Holy Quran? That says: Not he speaks out of his own desire- he relates to you only what is revealed to him: AN-NAJM, Verses 3&4 Grand prophet does not speak out of his desire and all of his words are according to revelation from glorious God!

2- Omar said Allah’s book (holy Quran) is enough for us, isn’t this a practical objection with messenger of Allah’s tradition? Because messenger of Allah commanded: “to write you something to immune you going astray” were not an ordinary and private matter but also it had special importance and is considered the best sense of Sunnah.

3- Is not Omar and his companions’ objection contrary to holy Quran that says: Obey the commands of Grand prophet and avoid things what he forbids you: So take what your messenger gives you and what ever he forbids you, abstain from it and fear from the disobedience of Allah’s commands, verily Allah is the sever Retributing: AL-HASHR, Verse 7

4- Bukhari says: The people made noise and disputes beside the bed of Allah’s Messenger. Was not that contrary to Holy Quran which abstain anyone making any noise near holy Prophet? and consider such rude action the destroyer of good deeds: O, you who believe! Do not raise your voice above the voice of Allah’s Messenger when you are in his presence; and do not speak loudly to him as you ordinarily speak to one another; by being inconsiderate you may unknowingly ruin your good deeds: Al-Ahzab, Verse 2

5- Is not the dispute of companions and their disobey of Grand Prophet’s commands contrary to Holy Quran that orders to accept the opinion of Grand Prophet in any case of opinions diversity? And those who do not accept the opinion of Allah’s Messenger are not regarded believers: No, by your creator and nurturer! They will not be considered believers, unless they accept you as their judge in all that they dispute among themselves; And [Also] if they do not find in their souls any resistance against what you decide, and submit [them selves] with total submission [to your judgment]: An-Nisa, Verse: 65

6- The Grand Prophet intended to write something to prevent the Nation from going astray. Did not that prevention of writing matters cause the astray of People?

Do not you acknowledge grand prophet’s words or acknowledge? If you acknowledge, has that astray happened or deny it? And if you accept, what astray was involved Islamic community except deviation from explicit caliphate matter?

7- Before Omar and his companions who were in objection with Messenger of Allah to write will, there also were people who were trying to write the will: SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL. 7, P. 9, SAHIH MOSLEM, VOL. 5, P. 75.

Even grand Prophet’s wives protested to Omar’s team which resulted Omar’s insolence and Grand Prophet’s defense: ATTABAQAT AL-KUBA, LI-IBN SAD, VOL. 2, P. 244, AL-MUJAM AL-USAT LIT-TABRANI: 288/5, MAJMAUZ ZAVAID AL-HEYTHAMI ASH-SHAFEI: 34/9, KANZUL UMMAL: 644/5, HADITH: 14133. The wives called from back of the curtains: Do not you hear Messenger of Allah’s speech? Omar said: you are the same as Joseph’s enamored who cry restlessly at the time of Prophet’s patience and get on his neck at the time of his healthy.

Messenger of Allah said: Do not protest them (the wives) and leave them alone because they are better than you.

Tell us, what happened that Omar and his companions got over to opposing team? And whose action between two teams was contrary to Holy Quran and Sunnah?

8- What does it mean that Ibn Abbas names this matter as a big catastrophe and calamity? SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL. 8, P. 161.

Are not enough Ibn Abbas’s hear-rendering cry and his interpretation of this happening as a heart-rending passion to think about it for a bit and think about the depth of disaster?

9- Messenger of Allah who is honored to be the best of creatures, got so annoyed and wrathful from such behavior which was contrary to holy Quran and Sunnah that commanded everyone to leave the house. SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL. 7, P. 9

How can be justifiable this behavior of companions with this holy verse: Those who raise Allah’s wrath and annoy Allah’s Messenger, for them will be the curse and wrath of Allah both in this world and in the hereafter: Al-Ahzab, Verse 57.

10- If you according to Omar consider Messenger of Allah’s words raving at the time his death because of sickness overcome and are not considered reason, then why do you adduce to Messenger of Allah’s words at the time of his death to prove Abu-Bakr’s Caliphate that said to Ayisha: Tell Abu-Bakr to perform pray for people. SAHIH BUKHARI: 162/1 KITABUL AZAN & P. 165- KASHAFUL QINAA LIL BUHUTI, VOL. 1, P. 573, AL-MAVAQIF: 365/8.

11- But although Abu-Bakr got uncurious when he was writing his will and kept writing it when became conscious, no one said to him that the ache has overcome him or raving! (KANZUL AMAL, VOL. 5, P. 678, TARIKH MADINATUL DAMESHQ LI IBN ASAKIR, VOL. 39, P. 186 AND VOL. 44, O. 248, SEE: TARIKHUL TABARI 353/2, SIRA OMAR LI IBN AL-JUZI: 37, TARIKH IBN-KHLDUN: 85/2)

While the person who attributed raving to messenger of Allah adduces to Abu-Baker’s will at the verge of his death to prove legality of his caliphate. (TARIKH AL-TABARI: 618/2)

12- Tabrani, Soyuti and Zahabi quote: Messenger of Allah said: “None of nations struggle with each other after their prophet’s death unless the false and null groups overcome to right group.” (AL-MUJAMUL AUSAT: 370/7, AL-JAMIUS SAGHIR LES-SOYUTI: 481/2: MAJMAUZ ZAVAID: 157/1, AZ-ZAHABI, SIR ALAMUN NABLA: 311/4, TAZKIRATUL HOFAZ: 87/1) Regarding this tradition, how the struggle of Saqifah and victory of Abu-Bakr and Omar is justifiable?

Consensus of Muhajirin (Migrants) and Ansar (Assisters)

13- You say: Abu-Bakr’s allegiance took place with the consensus of all migrants and assisters but Omar Ibn Kattab says all of the migrants members objected besides Ali (a.s) and Zobayr and all of their followers disagree too. Is your claim right or Omar Ibn Khattab’s? (SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL.8, P. 26, KITABUL MUHARABIN, BAB RAJMUL HIBLI MINAZ ZINA)

14- You adduce Abu-Bakr’s caliphate to the consensus of Hallul Aqd (experts and trustworthy) people while your outstanding scientists deny it. Maverdi Shafei (Passed away in 450) and Abu-Ali Hanbali (Passed away in 458) have confirmed: There were no consensus in Abu-Bakr’s allegiance and talk of consensus is an exaggerated one! (MAVERDI, AL-AHKAMUS SULTANIYAH: 33, ABU-ALI MUHAMMAD IBN HASSAN AL-FARA, AL-AHKAM SULTANIYYAH: 117)

Are you right or these two outstanding Sunni figures?

15- You claim: All of the opinion holders of companions and Migrations involve in conclusion of Abu-Bakr’s allegiance while your great commentator, Qertabi (Passed away in 671), deny it with certain and claims that Abu-Bakr’s caliphate was concluded just by Omar’s allegiance. (JAMIUL AHKAM AL-QURAN: VOL.1, P. 269-272)

16- By the way, what kind of consensus are you talking about that your great Mutikallim (speaker) like Imamal Haramein, Al-Ghazli, (Passed away in 478) deny it and says: In formation of Imam, there is no need to consensus, as like as Abu-Bakr’s Imamate (Leadership) was done before any consensus or announcing his leadership in Islamic land and the commands were signed and the circulars were issued and concludes in the end: Imamate is formed with the confirmation of just one member of Hall-o-Aqd people. (AL-IRSHAD FIL KALAM, P. 424)

17- Which consensus do you consider a caliphate’s credit while Azduddin Iji (Passed away in 756) who has written Al-mavaqif book and is one of the Sunni founder of Kalam science denies it and confirms it explicitly: there is no rational and intellectual reason in credit of consensus and just as one or two members of Hall-o-Aqd people to take action allegiance, Imamate is formed. Like Abu-Bakr’s Imamate with Omar’s allegiance and Othman’s Imamate with Abdur-Rahman Ibn Auf’s allegiance.

It is interesting that he adds: they did not consider necessary the consensus of Medina people in Abu-Bakr’s Imamate, let alone the consensus of all nation (Ummah) (AL-MAVAQIF FI ELMIL KALAM: 8, P.351)

Also Ibn Arabi Maliki, (passed away in 543) another outstanding Sunni figure says: There is no need to attendance of All people in Imamate election and this election can be done with presence of one or two! (SHARH SONAN TERMEZY, 13 P. 229)

Are you right or those outstanding scientific figures?

18- If the allegiance is correct with presence of one or two members of Hall-o-Aqd people and without consulting any Muslims, then why Omar threatened to be killed both the person who take or receive allegiance after that time? (SAHIH AL-BUKHARI, VOL. 8, P. 26) And if this action is contrary to belief and it is abstained and whose blood may be shed with immunity (Mahdurod-dam), why this command was not sentenced in Saqifah issue?

19- You say: Imam Ali (a.s) satisfied with Abu-Bakr and Omar while Omar addressed Ali (A.S) and Abbas (Grand Prophet’s uncle) in present of many people that: You both consider Abu-Bakr and me as a liar, sinful and tricky. (SAHIH MOSLEM, VOL. 5, P. 152, KITABL JIHAD, BAB 15, HUKMUL FAYE HADITH 49)

Are you right or Omar?

20- Second caliph assigned six people and said: Choose one among your selves, in the other words, choose one who mostly deserves the leadership of Muslims and Grand prophet’s successor and added if anyone of them objects, he is going to be decapitated. (TARIKH TABARI: 294/3, TARIKH AL-MEDINA LI IBN SHABAT AN-NAMIRI: 925/3, ALKAMIL LI IBN ATHIR: 35/3)

How he sentence the assassination of somebody who deserves to hold the position of caliphate?

21- It has been quoted in Sahih Bukhari and Moslem and other trustworthy books of Sunni that grand prophet said: “Fatima is part of my body and anyone who suffers and makes angry her suffers and makes angry me!” (SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: 210/4, 141/7, AL-MUSTAFRAK, 153/3, MAJMAUZ ZAVAID: 203/9, AL-MUJAM AL-KABIR LIL TABRANI: 108/1, 401/22, TARIKH MADINAH DAMISHQ: 156/3, ASADUL GHABAH: 522/5, AL-ISABAH: 265/8, 266, TAHZIBUT TAHZIB: 391/21, SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: 210/4, SHAHIH MUSLIM; 141/7, AL-MUSNAF LI IBN SHIBATUL KUFI: 526/7, AS-SUNANUL KUBRA LIN NISAEI: 97/5 HADITH 8370, AL-MUJAMUL KABIR LIT TABRANI: 404/22, AL-JAMI AS-SAGHIR LIS-SUYUTI: 208/2 TARIKH MADINAH DAMISHQ: 156/3) and from other side inside Sahih Bukhari and Muslem has been quoted that Fatima was wrathful of Abu-Bakr and she did not talk with him till the end of her life. (SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: 42/4, SAHIH MUSLIM: 154/5)

And holy Quran Says: Those who raise Allah’s wrath and annoy Allah’s Messenger for them will be both in this world and in the hereafter: AL-AHZAB, Verse 57.

What is your answer for this about this intricate?

Soheili a great Sunni scholar (passed away in 581) has argued to this narration that anyone who contempt Hazrat Zahra, will be pagan! (FEYZUL GHADIR SHARH AL-JAME AS-SAGHIR LILMINAVI: 554/4)

Ibn Hajar says in order to justify it: … (FATHUL BARI: 82/7: SHARHUL MAHIB LIZ ZARGHANI AL-MALIKI: 205/3)

Manavi, the writer of Feyzul Ghadir quotes by Abu-Naeem and Deylami that Grand Prophet said: “Fatima is the light of my eyes, anyone who annoy her annoy me and anyone who annoy me annoy Allah, and is curse of Allah and the inhabitants of heavens and earth for him” (FEYZUL GHADIR, SHARHUL JAM AS-SAGHIR LILMANVI: 24/6, HADITH 8267)

22- Regarding the aforementioned matters, have you ever thought about Abu-Bakr’s words and attributed the worst contempt and abusive words to Imam Ali (A.S) and Hazrat Zahra right after her speech. (AS-SAQIFATU VA FADAK LILJUHARI, P. 104, SHARHUL NAJUL BALAGHA LI IBN ABI HADID: 215/16, DALAIL AL-IMAMAH LIT TABARI, P. 123) Abu-Bakr compared Imam Ali as a fox and Hazrat Zahra as his tale. Was this the reward of Prophetic mission? : Say [O, Messenger!]: No wage I ask you for my mission, [Messenger’s reward is with Allah] but all I expect is the affection to my near kin: SHAURA, Verse 23.

Do you think this person deserves owning caliphate of prophet who was honored to: And [O, Mohammad!] verily, you are a man of high level character. AL-QALAM, Verse 4.

You are requested to reconsider the conversations which were exchanged between Ibn Abil Hadid and his teacher Naghib and then you yourselves judge! (SHARH NAHJUL BALAGHA: 215/16)

23- There has been quoted by grand prophet in you’re the most reliable books: “Any one who die without believing an Imam, has died in ignorance” (MOSNAD AHMAD, VOL. 4, P. 96, AL-MUJAM AL-KABIR LIT TABRANI, VOL. 19, P. 388, MAJMAUZ ZAVAID AL-HEYTHAMI, VOL. 5 P. 218, SHARH NAHJUL BALAGHA, IBN ABIL HADID, VOL. 9, P. 155)

And Bukhari quotes by Ibn Abbas in his Sahih that grand prophet said: …. (SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: 105/8 KITABAL AHKAM)

And also Muslim in his Sahih by means of Abu-Harirah narrate from Grand Prophet: … (SAHIH MOSLIM; 21/6, KITABAL IMARAH BABUL AMR BI LUZUMIL JAMAAH)

Now we ask you that, what is Hazrat Zahra’s task who did not involve in Abu-Bakr’s allegiance? While Tathir (cleanness) verse had revealed in her right and there are hundreds of narrations in her virtue. Like:Fatima is the master of this nations or Fatima is the master of Paradise inhabitants. (SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL. 7, P. 142, SAHIH MUSLIM, VOL. 7, P. 143, SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL. 4, P. 209, 219)

Is not the narration “die in ignorance” a trustable one? Or Hazrat Zahra did not follow the grand prophet’s words and Sunnah? Or she did not consider Abu-Bakr deserved to successor position?

24- You say grand prophet did not determine anyone to the leadership of People and put that responsibility on people’s shoulder while this theory is contrary to holy Quran and Sunnah because Glorious Allah says about Hazrat Abraham (a.s) that we determine you as Imam and leader of people: Verily I will appoint you a Devine leader for mankind. AL-BAGHARAH, Verse 124 and says about Hazrat Davood: O, Davood! We did indeed appoint you a Devine governor in the land, so judge between men according to Justice (and do not follow the desire of own heart) SAD, Verse 26.

Hazrat Musa request God to appoint his successor after him self: And appoint an assistant for me of my family. TAHA, Verse 29. And God said in response to Musa’s pray: O, Musa! You are bestowed whatever you prayed for. TAHA, Verse 36.

Glorious God says with regard to Bani-Israel: And we appointed from among them messengers and Divine leaders for the guidance of their people. SAJDAH, Verse 24

So, in all of the mentioned verses, appointing of Caliph and leaders is attributed to Glorious God.

Also Sunni scholars like Ibn Hisham and Ibn Kathir and Ibn Havvan and others have quoted that when messenger of Allah was inviting Arabian tribes to accept Islam, some of outstanding figures of tribes like Bani Amer Ibn Sasaah said to him: If we support you and you prosper, will you appoint us you successor after yourself? Grand prophet answered: “Appointing the leader is out of my power but it is with the leave of God and appoint anyone he wishes.” He said: we can not sacrifice our lives for your aims and to see the position of management at the hand of others after victory. (ATH-THAQAT LI IBN HABBAN: 89/1, AL-BADAYATU VAN-NAHAYA I IBN KATHIR, VOL. 9, P. 171)

The same happened with Qashir Ibn Kaab Rabiah and he also offered messenger of Allah: If we do not receive a part of administration in Islamic government, we will not believe in Islam. (SIRA IBN HISHAM, VOL. 2, P. 289, AS-SIRATUN NABAVIYAH LI IBN KATHIR VOL.2, P. 157, MAAL MUSTAFA LID DUKTURAH BINTASH SHATI, P. 161)

Messenger of Allah, who was in the worst situation and needed necessary forces and assistances, did not attract the tribes’ assistance with the promise of successor.

Also Huzah, king of Yemen who was invited to accept Islam, dispatched a group of people to Grand prophet and reported if he achieves a portion of administration, he will be ready to believe in Islam and assist the Muslim, but messenger of Allah said: “Even if he wants the management of unutilized land, I will never offer him” (TABAGHAT IBN SAD: 262/1, NASBUR RAYAH LIZIALI: 567/6)

Revolt of Nakithin and Qasitin against Islamic governor

25- In Sahih Bukhari and Muslim it has been quoted by messenger of Allah, If you noticed any unsatisfying action from Islamic governor, you must be patient and tolerate it because if any one who just separate for a distance of a span from Muslim community, his death is the same as ignorance. (SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: 87/8, SAHIH MUSLIM: 21/6 KITABUL IMARAH)

And it has been quoted in Ahmad Ibn Hanbal’s Musnad and Termezi Sahih: Getting separate for a span from people massive, will cause exit of Islamic religion. (MUSNAD AHMAD: 180/5, SUNAN ABI DAVOOD: 426/2, SUNANUT TERMEZI: 226/4, AL-MUSTADRAK: 117/1 …) Tabrani and Heythami quoted from Messenger of Allah: “If anyone separate for amount of a bow string from community, his pray and fasting will be accepted and his body will be firewood of Hill”(AL-MUJAMUL KABIR: 302/3, MAJMAUZ ZAVAEED: 217/5)

Regarding these narrations now we ask; what is the task of those who revolted before Hazrat Ali (a.s) as the official Islamic governor after assassination of Othman?

What are your explanations about the Ayisha, Talha, Zubayr who separated from Islamic community and caused destructive chaos which resulted in annihilation of thousands of People?

If you say they did Ijtihad but made a mistake in this big error which resulted in killing of thousands Muslims, they will receive this answer that: then you will not find error in the world, because anyone who commits an error, verily has an excuse and explanation for himself.

By the way, what is Muavia’s task who revolted against the caliph in right and created such a chaos between Moslems that its signs are obvious after 15 centuries?

It is interesting that Hakim Neyshapuri and Tabrani and Soyuti quotes by Muaviyah that Messenger of Allah said that anyone who get separate from Muslim community for a span, hw will enter into hell’s fire. (MUSTADRAK AL-HAKIM: 118/1, AL-MUJAM AL-KABIR LIT TABRANI: 53/6, AD-DURUL MANTHUR: 113/5, KANZUL UMMAL: 208/1, HADITH: 1039)

If you say: Muaviyah was also a caliph because Sham’s people had allegiance with him, we will reply: According to narration of Sahih Muslim from Messenger of Allah if people swear allegiance to two people as caliph, people’s duty is support of first caliph and assassinating the latter one. (SAHIH MUSLIM: 23/6 KITABL IMARAH, AL-MUJAMUL AUOSAT: 144/3, TAFSIR AL-QIRTABI: 272/1)

By the way, according to successive narrations, did not grand prophet tell; “Ammar Yaser will be killed by trespasser, aggressor and tyrant group? (SAHIH BUKHARI: 207/3, SAHIH MUSLIM; 186/8, SAYR ALAM AN-NABLA: 421/1)

Did not he say: Killer of Ammar will be in the center of Hell fire? (AL-MUSTADRAK: 387/3)

This narration was so strong and undeniable that after martyrdom of Ammar some of Muaviyah’s friend like Amro Ibn As hesitated in legitimacy of Muaviyah and left the war and as result many people withdrew the fight against Hazrat Ali (a.s) following to him as well. (IHQAQUL HAQ: 448/8, AN NURUL ABSAR LISHABLANJI, P. 90, KHULASA ABAQAT AL-ANVAR: 59/3, NAFAHATUL AZHAR, VOL. 3, P. 54)

When Muaviyah saw such dangerous situation addressed Amro Ibn As: Be silent, I swear to God, you always were plunge into your excrement, did we kill Ammar? Ammar was killed by Ali and his followers that draw him out of his house and put before our Sabers and spears! (MOSNAD AHMAD: 199/4, MAJMAUZ ZAVAID: 242/7, AL-MUSTADRAK: 155/2)

When Hazrat Amir Al-muminin noticed this explanation of Muaviyah, he said: “In this case we must say that Grand prophet killed Hamzah and Martyrdoms of Ohud battle because he drew them out their houses.” (AL-MIEYAR VAL-MUVAZINAH, P. 97, VAQAT SIFFIN, P. 343, SAHIH SHARUL AQIDAH… P. 642, AN-NASAIH AL-KAFIYAH, P. 39)

The justice of the companions

That is you say all of the companions were just and all of them are inhabitant of paradise and criticism and evaluation about their actions are forbidden. And if somebody wants to criticize or evaluate their performance, he will be accused of atheist and exit from Islam religion. Because they believe, companions are narrators of Holy Quran and Sunnah and in fact any criticizing of them is questioning the book and Sunnah. (AL-KIFAYAH FI ELM AR-RIVAYAH: 67)

The situation reached a point that some jurisconsults of yours sentenced that criticism of companions cause apostasy and objection with Islam and it has no reply but saber! (USULUL SARAKHSI: 134/2)

And of the most important difficulty of yours against Shiite during the history was that they (the Shiite) protested against some companions and have considered their performance contrary to the book and Sunnah and have put this means of their debauchery and excommunication.

Now we pose some question to our free thinker brothers of Sunni people, hoping that they think about it a bit and see how much does this method of thinking conform to Holy Quran and factual Sunnah of messenger of Allah?

26- Is this justice and chastity special to some companions of grand prophet or all other companions of prophet (S.A) sharing this specification as well?

27- Is this claim guaranteed by holy Quran and narrations or it is just the theory of some extremist scholars?

Spread of hypocrisy among companions

28- There are several Quranic verses that remind the danger of hypocrites and turned to reproach them and even an independent Sura have been revealed about them and has announced that the worst place of hell have allocated for them! And with the interpretation of some Sunni scientists we notice that near to one third of Holy Quran is about the hypocrites and reprimand and treachery of them. (AN-NIFAQ VAL MUNAFIQUN, PROFESSOR IBRAHIM ALI SALIM MISRI)

Were these hypocrites and independent and realized spectrum and were not involved in companion member or there were included in? Whatever your answer might be, the hypocrites were a powerful gang and group which are regarded a big danger for Islamic community and their activity was such sophisticated, planned and confidential that even was hidden from view point of Islamic governor: Some of the desert dwellers Arabs around you are hypocrites and some of the people of Madinah city are those who persist in hypocrisy, you [O, Messenger] do not know them, we know them …AT-TAUBAH- Verse 101]

29- Did all of these hypocrites die and ruin right away and their offspring overthrew forever after the death of Messenger of Allah or were they still amongst and part of people?

So if hypocrites were mixed in such a way with Muslims that even grand prophet could not realize them, can we confirm the justice of all companions?

30- We have in Sahih Moslim that grand prophet said: There are 12 people among my companions who are hypocrites and plot (against Muslims), now with this situation, can you confirm the justice of all companions?

The extreme fear of Second caliph from contamination to hypocrisy

The gang of hypocrites was so extensive and sophisticated and hypocrisy was so firmly rooted among companions that any of prophet’s companions feared to be uncovered their secret treacherously plans and get disgraced in general public by revelation of a verse of holy Quran, so that second caliph, Omar Ibn Khattab says; When At-taubah Sura was revealed and uncovered the plot of hypocrites, we imagined that it might be inspired a verse about each of us and divulge error behavior of ours. (ZADUL MASIR: 316/3)

In another narration he says that we must name this Sura, torture because this Sura disgraced people in such a way that it was so close to be immune anyone. (AD-DURUL MANTHUR: 208/3)

Regarding the mentioned materials, can we say that all of the Grand prophet’s companions were just and paradise is necessary for them? And is not this belief contrary to holy Quran and theory of the caliph [Omar]?

31- Ibn Kathir one of the outstanding Sunni scholars says: Omar Ibn Khattab would perform pray for any of companions when he died, if Hozayfa (he was famous to realize the hypocrites ones) did not witness to be free of anyone’s hypocrisy, he would not perform pray to his body. (TAFSIR IBN KATHIR: 399/2)

You say, criticism of companion’s performance equal atheism and pagan, but hoe do you render an account of Omar’s behaviors?

32- By the way, have you ever asked yourselves why Omar Ibn Khattab was swearing Hoayfah if he was involved in among those who conspired? (TAFSIR IBN KATHIR: 399/2, AL-BADAYAH VAN-NAHAYAH: 25/5, JAMIUL BAYAN LIT-TABARI: 16/11)

33- Why did not other pure companions of messenger of Allah like Salman, Abuzar and Miqdad and … ask this question? Did Omar have hesitation about himself?

34- Do not you claim that Omar was involve in those who grand prophet announced absolute tiding of paradise? Does not this question of Omar show his skeptic in grand prophet’s words? Or consider the Hadith ASHRAH MUBASHSHIRAH a forged and unfounded one?

The assassination plan of Messenger of Allah by hypocrites

35- Who were the people intended to assassinate grand prophet when he was returning back battle? Was this inauspicious pan of Jews and polytheists or was it the plan of companion who wanted to such dangerous action? If glorious God did not protect his messenger from the evil of this plot, how big catastrophe Islamic community would encounter?

36- What happened to all these hypocrites who suffered sacred heart of Messenger of Allah? Where did they go that there is no sign of them after Grand prophet in the history? Was the clean and sacred essence of grand prophet reason of hypocrisy? This they convert to the best and cleanest people of the land after the death of messenger of Allah that any criticism of them is considered inexcusable sin?

Did Rashidin caliphs revised them with their propaganda and prosecution and converted their hypocrisy souls to belief with elixir of believe creating? Or after grand prophet both explicit hypocrisy with confidential hypocrisy confederated and distributed the key position between them and rendered an account of their behaviors before others protest with: we use hypocrite’s force but their sin are upon themselves! (AL-MUSNAF LI-IBN ABI SHIBAH: 269/7, HADITH: 120, KANZUL AMAL, VOL.4, and P. 614)

By the way, why just Omar Ibn Khattab among all companions swear Hozayfa Yamami if he included among the hypocrites that planed and attended in the assassination of grand prophet? (TAFSIR IBN KATHIR: 399/2, JAMIUL BAYAN LIT-TABARI: 16/11)

Attendance of caliphs in abortive assassination of Grand prophet

One of the most important questions is that according to Ibn Hazam Andolusi -one of the outstanding Sunni scientist- mentions the name of Abu-Bakr, Omar and Othman’s names among those who planned the assassination of grand prophet in his jurisconsults book “Al-Muhalla”. Although Ibn Hazam (SIR ALAMUN NABLA: 184/18, VA QARIB MIN HAZA FI EBR: 239/3, DUVALUL ISALM: 207/1, TABAQATUL HUFFAZ: 436, AL-ALAM: 254/4) consider his narration a weak one because of occurring of Valid Ibn Jomaye in the record, but by referring to Rijali’s (distinguished men) book of Sunni, it is obvious that majority of Rijal distinguisher have confirmed them. (TARIKHUTH THUQAT: 465 RAGHAM: 1773, TABAQAT: 354/6, KITABUTH THAQAT: 492/5, AL-JARH VAL TADIL: 8/9 RAQAM 34, VA TAHZIBUL KAMAL: 35/31M TARIKHUL ISLAM: 661/9) And this narrator is of the distinguished man of Bukhari and Sahih and Abi Davood Sonan and Sahih Termizi and Sonan Nisaei. (TAHZIBUT TAHZIB: 122/11)

Is it legal instrumental use of hypocrites?

37- By referring to the book and Sunnah, it gets clean that danger of Hypocrites for Islam and Muslims was more than danger of pagan and polytheist and it has been noted in several verses to their conspiracy against Islam and Muslims so that an independent sura has been revealed about them and according to Mr. Ibrahim Ali Salim, one of the Egiptian writer, approximately 10 parts (from 30 parts) that is one third of holy Quran is about hypocrites. (AN-NIFAQ, IBRAHIM LI SALIM)

And holy Quran considers them as an obstacle in Islam’s path: You see that the hypocrites turn away from you with total aversion: AN-NISA, Verse 61. And abstain them of any feeling pity for them and does not consider them conducted: what has happened to you that you are two parties about hypocrites? Where as Allah has overthrown them for their evil deeds. Do you intend to guide those whom Allah (because of their disobedience) has deprived from his guidance? Those whom Allah has left in their astray, you [O, Messenger] shall never find for them a way (of Guidance): AN-NISSA, Verse: 88)

And put them in the same rank as pagans in hell and there will be the curse of Allah for them: Allah has promised the hypocrites men and women and the disbelievers to enter them in the hell fire, there in, they shall abide forever. This will be sufficient for them, for them will be the curse of Allah and an enduring torment: At-Taubah, Verse. 68) And put their place at the lowest stage of the hell: O, Messenger, Verily the hypocrites will be in the lowest stage of the hell and you shall never find a helper for them: An-Nisa, Verse 145.

Regarding these, why did second caliph use from their essence and offered them position? And he (Omar) says: we use of hypocrites’ forces but their sins are upon themselves. AL-MUSNAF LI-IBN ABI SHIBAH: 269/7, HADITH 120, KANZUL UMMAL, VOL. 4, P. 614

This action is protested by one of the companions (Huzayfah) but he replies: I use of their forces and I am careful of their performances. KANZUL UMMAL: 5, P. 771.

While it has been quoted from Omar Ibn Khattab himself who said if anyone use of libertine’s essence and appoint him to a position, he himself will of the same rank as libertine. KANZUL UMMAL: 5, P. 761, HADITH 14306

How much distance does it exist between Omar’s speech and his action? It causes Allah’s wrath gravely that you say (and promise) something that you do not fulfill: As-Saf, Verse 3

38- Someone might say: the hypocrites were milder at the era of Omar or they were less dangerous than Messenger of Allah’s era. SUNAN ALKUBRA: 36/9

But according to Sahih Bukhari’s narration from Huzayfah, the evil of hypocrites was more than hypocrites of Grand Prophet’s era, while their hypocrisy had converted to pagan after Messenger of Allah. SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: 100/8, KITABUL FITAN

Omar’s recommendation to serve desert dweller Arabs

39- Holy Quran says about desert-dweller Arabs: The desert-dweller Arabs are the worst in disbelief and hypocrisy. At-Taubah, Verse97 Ibn Kathir says about the interpretation of this verse: the disbelief and hypocrisy of desert-dweller Arabs is bigger and excessive than others. TAFTHIR IBN KATHIR, VOL. 2, P. 397, TAFSIR AL-QIRTABI, VOL. 8, P. 231.

But regarding all these specification of Arabs, second caliph at the time of his death recommends to do good for them because they are the roots of Arabs and the origin of Islam. SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL. 4, P. 206.

Are not these words contrary to explicit verse of Holy Quran?

40- If any one of you ask: Maybe this recommendation of Omar was because of their good serving of Desert-dweller Arabs in Medina for stabilization of Abu-Bakr’s caliphate, what would you reply? When Omar Ibn Khattab encountered with sever struggles of Saqifah people and extreme objection of emigrants and assisters, SAHIH BUKHARI, VOL. 8, P. 26, KITABAL MUHARIBIN he got pleased by noticing Arab desert dweller who had entered to scene with pre-arrangements and said: When I glanced at Aslam tribe (one of the big tribe around Medina), I was certain that victory was ours. TARIKH AT-TABARI, VOL. 2, P. 458, KAMIL IBN ATHIR, VOL. 2, P. 224.

And he used from their essence in direction of strengthening Abu-Bakr’s caliphate and overthrowing of the opponents. SHARH IBN ABIL HADID: 219/1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

It's very interesting after the event of Ghadeer that Umar (r.a.) and other Sahaba (r.a.) gave thanks to Imam Ali (a.s.). So, if they allegedly gave Bayah, then what was the point of the meeting at Saqeefah? And if it was clear that Abu Bakr (r.a.) was suppose to be the successor, then why did they all meet up at Saqeefa in the first place?

(bismillah)

(salam)

Ah this is what is the harshest in explaining to someone, especially one conditioned to love them. Firstly understand that the Sahaba who betrayed the Prophet [sawaws] were not unexpected to do that as the Prophet [sawaws] had said during his life in a Hadeeth that is even present in the books of our brothers, the Ahlu`s Sunnah Wa`l Jama`ah, the following:

Narrated Ibn Abbās:

The Prophet [sawaws] said, "You will be gathered (on the Day of Qiyāmah), bare-footed, naked and not circumcised." He then recited:--'As We began the first creation, We, shall repeat it: A Promise We have undertaken: Truly we shall do it.' (21.104) He added, "The first to be dressed on the Day of Qiyāmah, will be Ibrāhīm, and some of MY ṢAḤĀBAH will be taken towards the left side (i.e. to the Fire), and I will say: 'My Ṣaḥābah! My Ṣaḥābah!' It will be said: 'They renegade from Islām After you left them.' Then I will say as the pious slave (i.e. ‘Īsā) said. 'And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them. When You took me up You were the Watcher over them, And You are a witness to all things. If You punish them. They are Your slaves And if You forgive them, Verily you, only You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise." (5.120-121)

Imām al-Bukhārī records in his Ṣaḥīḥ (Beirut: Dār Ibn Kathīr; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Mustafā Dīb al-Baghā], vol. 3, p. 1222, # 3171; vol. 3, p. 1272, # 3263; vol. vol. 4, p. 1691 # 4349; and vol. 4, p. 1766, # 4463

From the thread of brother Al-MuHammadee "Sahaba Myths", so they were innocent and it was assumed there would be those who would "Renegade" afterwards. Now power is something which can easily corrupt a human and thus it was a fight to get the power, I really can't do the subject of why they would do this all much justice in a few paragraphs, so let me leave some reading material here for you to view, this book goes through these issues in depth.

And I have already stated earlier Imam Ali [as] made multiple references to his claim to power earlier, and quoted Nahjul Balagha for an instance he said it in. You may also refer to the incident of the "Swearing by Allah" (found in this book) where this has gone in much further depth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waleykum Salaam, Good question. Also, why not a single person mentioned 'Ghadir', even Ali (ra) himself, when Abubakr (ra) was being elected as the first successor of the Prophet (saw)?

"Ali upon Abu Bakr being elected said: "If his claim for the caliphate was based on him being a close relative of the Prophet then nobody was closer to the Prophet than I and if his claim was based on shura then what kind of a shura was this in which I and Bani Hashim were not invited""

One more question. Why the people of Ansar (may Allah be pleased with them) gathered to appoint a leader, weren't they aware of 'Ghadir where Ali (ra)was appointed'?

Power grab, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

I don't think I'm missing the point at all. When the Prophet (pbuh) was revealed that he was the Messenger of God, he told people the true message. Now, if Imam Ali (a.s.) is the true divine successor, wouldn't it make sense that he would claim this as well so people would follow on the straight path?

When the prophet revealed that he is the successor, majority did not follow him except a few shias. What makes you think they will follow him if Ali himself sayst it. Satan knows where imamat lies and he has been successful in fooling the majority of people. Even the prophet cannot decide who will be the successor but it is only Allah who decides and there is proof of it in the Quran. By the way, did you get a chance to watch the videos I sent you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the prophet revealed that he is the successor, majority did not follow him except a few shias. What makes you think they will follow him if Ali himself sayst it. Satan knows where imamat lies and he has been successful in fooling the majority of people. Even the prophet cannot decide who will be the successor but it is only Allah who decides and there is proof of it in the Quran. By the way, did you get a chance to watch the videos I sent you?

Salam brother,

Yes I did watch those videos you sent me. They were really informative and kind of helped me grasp the concept of imamate/wilayat a bit better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of one's views of Abu Bakr the meeting at Saqifah was haram, the Qur'an has explicitly stated in all instances of leadership that they are to be chosen by Allah (Swt), Talut is the best example, not a prophet only a 'king' or caliph who was explicitly chosen by Allah (Swt) as stated by the prophet of his time. So why would they mention Ghadir Khumm when even a cursory reading of the Qur'an would make it known they have no authority to do what they did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Ali upon Abu Bakr being elected said: "If his claim for the caliphate was based on him being a close relative of the Prophet then nobody was closer to the Prophet than I and if his claim was based on shura then what kind of a shura was this in which I and Bani Hashim were not invited""

Ali's (ra) only objection was why He was not consulted in Saqeefa.

[...] Thereupon the Muhajirs (Sahabah) embraced him and accepted his excuse and Ali (Ibn Abi Talib) and Al-Zubayr said: "We got only upset for being delayed in the matter of MASHAWIRAH (Shura/consultation) [at Saqifah], we believe that Abu Bakr is the most deserving of the Caliphate after Rasulullah, peace and blessings be upon him, for he He was the companion of the Messenger of Allah in the cave, THE SECOND OF TWO, and verily, we are well aware of his privilege and greatness. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessing be upon him, had ordered him to lead the prayers while he was alive.”

[Al-Hakim said in his Al Mustadrak 3/70. 4422: Sahih according to the conditions of the Shaykhayn, they did not narrated it and Al-Dhahabi agreed with Al-Hakim, Ibn Kathir in his Al Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, Vol 5 said:'It's chain is authentic, walillahi Al-Hamdu wal-Minnah]

Regardless of one's views of Abu Bakr the meeting at Saqifah was haram, the Qur'an has explicitly stated in all instances of leadership that they are to be chosen by Allah (Swt), Talut is the best example, not a prophet only a 'king' or caliph who was explicitly chosen by Allah (Swt) as stated by the prophet of his time. So why would they mention Ghadir Khumm when even a cursory reading of the Qur'an would make it known they have no authority to do what they did?

Then why the Shia play the Saqifa game in Iran? Why the 'assembly of experts' appoint the supreme leader of Iran? Leader must be appointed by Allah not people, don't you claim?

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why the Shia play the Saqifa game in Iran? Why the 'assembly of experts' appoint the supreme leader of Iran?

Rather, what game are you playing? - Iran is Iran - and ''Assembly of Experts'' have more power than the Leader of Iran - and they are also chosen by people. Power in Iran is divided between many structures and president is chosen by people so it is democracy. It cannot be compared to Saqifa.

Leader must be appointed by Allah not people, don't you claim?

There is already a Imam appointed by Allah (which is in ghaybah) so why you are asking stupid questions again?

Edited by Rasul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree brother, the leader must be appointed by Allah (Swt). This is not my independent claim, this is from the Qur'an, you are more than welcome to bring counter-proof rather than this rhetoric about Iran which has no significance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali's (ra) only objection was why He was not consulted in Saqeefa.

[...] Thereupon the Muhajirs (Sahabah) embraced him and accepted his excuse and Ali (Ibn Abi Talib) and Al-Zubayr said: "We got only upset for being delayed in the matter of MASHAWIRAH (Shura/consultation) [at Saqifah], we believe that Abu Bakr is the most deserving of the Caliphate after Rasulullah, peace and blessings be upon him, for he He was the companion of the Messenger of Allah in the cave, THE SECOND OF TWO, and verily, we are well aware of his privilege and greatness. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessing be upon him, had ordered him to lead the prayers while he was alive.”

[Al-Hakim said in his Al Mustadrak 3/70. 4422: Sahih according to the conditions of the Shaykhayn, they did not narrated it and Al-Dhahabi agreed with Al-Hakim, Ibn Kathir in his Al Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, Vol 5 said:'It's chain is authentic, walillahi Al-Hamdu wal-Minnah]

Then why the Shia play the Saqifa game in Iran? Why the 'assembly of experts' appoint the supreme leader of Iran? Leader must be appointed by Allah not people, don't you claim?

Salam,

He brings up a good point. Imam Ali (a.s.) may have wanted to be involved in the meeting and that may have been his objective, but where does he explicitly state that he was appointed by Allah (SWT)? The sermon in Nahjul Bhalaga speaks nothing of his (a.s.) divine imamate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

He brings up a good point. Imam Ali (a.s.) may have wanted to be involved in the meeting and that may have been his objective, but where does he explicitly state that he was appointed by Allah (SWT)? The sermon in Nahjul Bhalaga speaks nothing of his (a.s.) divine imamate.

bro please stop bringing the same questions that have been answered 9999999 times, we keep answering them and you keep forgetting, I dont know if your doing this on purpose but it seems like it, Im not going to keep answering the same question over and over. You research and find it from shia sources....or just search it on this forum...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ali's (ra) only objection was why He was not consulted in Saqeefa.

[...] Thereupon the Muhajirs (Sahabah) embraced him and accepted his excuse and Ali (Ibn Abi Talib) and Al-Zubayr said: "We got only upset for being delayed in the matter of MASHAWIRAH (Shura/consultation) [at Saqifah], we believe that Abu Bakr is the most deserving of the Caliphate after Rasulullah, peace and blessings be upon him, for he He was the companion of the Messenger of Allah in the cave, THE SECOND OF TWO, and verily, we are well aware of his privilege and greatness. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessing be upon him, had ordered him to lead the prayers while he was alive.”

[Al-Hakim said in his Al Mustadrak 3/70. 4422: Sahih according to the conditions of the Shaykhayn, they did not narrated it and Al-Dhahabi agreed with Al-Hakim, Ibn Kathir in his Al Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, Vol 5 said:'It's chain is authentic, walillahi Al-Hamdu wal-Minnah]

Then why the Shia play the Saqifa game in Iran? Why the 'assembly of experts' appoint the supreme leader of Iran? Leader must be appointed by Allah not people, don't you claim?

What greatness? Okay, tell me... Besides being one amongst a plethora of the Prophet's (sawa) companions & being inside a cave, what has the man done? Like literally, what did he do in the Messenger's life time for him to have such an amazing status? Because to tell you the truth majority his 'merits' if you wish to call them that, are from what the Prophet apparently said about him, same with Umar Ibn Khattab. I'm not claiming they did literally nothing for Islam at all but you will find that it is clearly obvious that majority of there 'merits' all stem from what the Prophet allegedly said about them, not what they actually did. A great example is the lovely narration in your signature.

So what has Abu Bakr done for `Ali (`a) to have said he is most deserving of the Caliphate? You can only use examples from the before the time the Prophet (sawa) returned to his Lord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beware!

By Allah the son of Abu Quhafah (Abu Bakr) dressed himself with it (the caliphate) and he certainly knew that my position in relation to it was the same as the position of the axis in relation to the hand-mill. The flood water flows down from me and the bird cannot fly up to me. I put a curtain against the caliphate and kept myself detached from it.

Then I began to think whether I should assault or endure calmly the blinding darkness of tribulations wherein the grown up are made feeble and the young grow old and the true believer acts under stain till he meets Allah (on his death). I found that endurance thereon was wiser. So I adopted patience although there was [Edited Out]ing in the eye and suffocation in the throat. I watched the plundering of my inheritance till the first one went his way but handed over the Caliphate to Ibn al-Khattab after himself.

My days are now passed on the camel's back while there were days when I enjoyed the company of Jabir's brother Hayyan. (quote of a poem)

It is strange that during his lifetime he wished to be released form the caliphate but he confirmed it for the other one after his death. No doubt these two shared its udders strictly among themselves. This one put the Caliphate in a tough enclosure where the utterance was haughty and the touch was rough. Mistakes were in plenty and so also the excuses therefore. One in contact with it was like the rider of an unruly camel. If he pulled up its rein the very nostril would be slit, but if he let it loose he would be thrown. Consequently, by Allah people got involved in recklessness, wickedness, unsteadiness, and deviation.

Nevertheless, I remained by patient despite length of period and stiffness of trial, till when he went his way (of death) he put the matter in a group (the council of Uthman ibn Affan, Ali ibn Abu Talib, Talhah ibn Ubaydullah, Abd ar-Rahman ibn Awf, Zubayr ibn al-Awwam, and Saad ibn Abu Waqqas) and regarded me to be one of them. But good Heavens! what had I to do with this "consultation"? Where was any doubt about me with regard to the first of them that I was now considered akin to these ones (meaning he was far above those in the council)? But I remained low when they were low and flew high when they flew high. One of them turned against me because of his hatred and the other got inclined the other way due to his in-law relationship and this thing and that thing (excuses), till the third man of these people stood up with heaving breasts between his dung and fodder. With him his children of his grand-father, (Umayyah) also stood up swallowing up Allah's wealth like a camel devouring the foliage of spring, till his rope broke down, his actions finished him and his gluttony brought him down prostrate (Uthman ibn Affan is infamous for having given away wealth and positions to Banu Umayyah)

At that moment, nothing took me by surprise, but the crowd of people rushing to me. It advanced towards me from every side like the mane of the hyena so much so that Hassan and Hussein were getting crushed and both the ends of my shoulder garment were torn. They collected around me like the herd of sheep and goats. When I took up the reigns of government one party broke away and another turned disobedient while the rest began to act wrongfully as if they had not heard the word of Allah saying:

"That abode in the hereafter, We assign it for those who intend not to exult themselves in the earth, nor (to make) mischief; and the end is best for the pious ones" (Qur'an 28:83)

Yes, by Allah, they had heard it and understood it but the world appeared glittering in their eyes and its embellishments seduced them. Behold, by Him who split the grain and created living beings, if people had not come to me and supporters had not exhausted the argument and if there had been no pledge of Allah with the learned to the effect that they should not acquiesce in the gluttony of the oppressor and the hunger of the oppressed I would have cast the rope of Caliphate on its own shoulders, and would have given the last one the same treatment as to the first one. Then you would have seen that in my view this world of yours is no better than the sneezing of a goat.

- Ali ibn Abu Talib in Sermon 3 of Nahjul Balagha.

I should add that the council spoken of in the sermon is not one that got together on their own, each member were chosen by Umar ibn al-Khattab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bro please stop bringing the same questions that have been answered 9999999 times, we keep answering them and you keep forgetting, I dont know if your doing this on purpose but it seems like it, Im not going to keep answering the same question over and over. You research and find it from shia sources....or just search it on this forum...

Brother, I've read the proofs that have been offered in this thread, and even after reading the Sermon of Shaqshaqiya, I have yet to see anything about divine succession; unless I am misreading something within that sermon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if Shaqshaqiya is referring to the sermon I posted, but I believe the sermon makes it quite plain that Ali saw Abu Bakr's and Umar's caliphates as unjust and that he had to choose either direct physical assault or to endure it. "I watched the plundering of my inheritance"

He chose endurance through both, and was then later begged by the people to take its position (if the objection is that he should have taken it without the people's consent this would have only lead to chaos and war, even when he took it WITH their consent did civil war break out and ignorant groups pop up imagine what would have happened if he had not acted with wisdom).

The Qur'an itself makes it unbelievably clear that succession and leadership is due to direct appointment by Allah, and there is not one instance wherein anything resembling saqifah is used.

And their prophet said to them: Surely Allah has raised Talut to be a king over you. They said: How can he hold kingship over us while we have a greater right to kingship than he, and he has not been granted an abundance of wealth? He said: Surely Allah has chosen him in preference to you, and He has increased him abundantly in knowledge and physique, and Allah grants His kingdom to whom He pleases, and Allah is Amplegiving, Knowing. (Qur'an 2:247)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ your second point Imam Mahdi a.s. is the Imam of our time. Your mixing up 2 very different points.

and Imam Khamenei is also the supreme leader of the time.

Again, why Shia in Iran appoint the supreme leader through Shura (the sunnah of saqifa). Leader should be appointed by Allah not people as you claim. I am not mixing anything. This is the exact thing you attack the Sahaba and the people of Saqifa for. Why it is good for you but not good for Sahaba?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What greatness? Okay, tell me... Besides being one amongst a plethora of the Prophet's (sawa) companions & being inside a cave, what has the man done? Like literally, what did he do in the Messenger's life time for him to have such an amazing status? Because to tell you the truth majority his 'merits' if you wish to call them that, are from what the Prophet apparently said about him, same with Umar Ibn Khattab. I'm not claiming they did literally nothing for Islam at all but you will find that it is clearly obvious that majority of there 'merits' all stem from what the Prophet allegedly said about them, not what they actually did. A great example is the lovely narration in your signature.

So what has Abu Bakr done for `Ali (`a) to have said he is most deserving of the Caliphate? You can only use examples from the before the time the Prophet (sawa) returned to his Lord.

You are asking me what Abubakr (ra) has done in the Prophets (saw) lifetime?

I think you really need to read a book about him. I recommend you to read this book by Dr. Ali Muhammad Sallaabee.

The Prophet (saw) said: "Behold, of all people the most generous toward me in regard to his companionship and his property was Abu Bakr and were I to choose anyone as my intimate friend, I would have chosen Abu Bakr as my dear friend, but (for him) I cherish Islamic brotherliness and love. There shall be left open no door in the mosque except Abu Bakr's door. [sahih Muslim]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and this sermon is WEAK and one of its narrators is a Khariji (according to shia standards).

It have come through many different chains - they strengthens each other.

Shaykh al-Mufid (Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn an-Nu`man, d. 413 A.H.) who was the teacher of as-Sayyid ar-Radi writes about the chain of authorities of this sermon:

''A number of relaters of traditions have related this sermon from Ibn `Abbas through numerous chains.''

Kitab al-Irshad by Shaykh al-Mufid, page 135,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each sermon in Nahjul Balagha was chosen in terms of eloquence by al-Radi, this is the main method through which all intellectual statements are confirmed. Even the Qur'an asks us to confirm its authenticity by pondering on its statements. And as the other brother said there is more than one chain of narration.

Besides even if someone is Khawarij, they might not be a liar rather than just foolish. Even Bukhari had many narrators who were Shia and he still regarded them as trustworthy: http://www.al-islam....murajaat/16.htm

As for existing governments that you mention see my last response.

Salam

Edited by Ratohnhaketon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam brother,

Yes I did watch those videos you sent me. They were really informative and kind of helped me grasp the concept of imamate/wilayat a bit better.

great

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

Just wondering, are there any Sunni/Sufi groups which believe in the occultation of the 12th Imam (a.s.)?

I dont know any sunni who believes in the occultation of the 12 Imam. In fact I hear from them that they hardly know about him. However there are some sunni scholars who have written books on imam mahdi and there are letures by them as well but they dont beleive in the occultation of the 12 Imam and dont have all the details of his personality and his reappearance as the jaffari sect does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

I was reading about the Occultation, then I came along these particular arguments on wikipedia. I don't know if they are actually true or not, but I was hoping some knowledgeable brothers can shed light on this:

"Traditionally, the first of the ghulāt was Abd Allah ibn Sabaʾ, who may have denied that Ali had died and predicting his return (rajʿa), which was considered one form of ghulū. Also, the notion of the absence (ghayba) of an imam who is due to return and establish justice as mahdi seem to have appeared first among the ghulāt.[1] Other positions which seem to have been considered ghulū by early writers were the (public) condemnation (sabb) of Abu Bakr and Umar as usurpers of Ali's right to be a successor of Muhammad, and the notion that the true imams were infallible (maʿṣūm).[1]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems ghulat in this article is being used to say that anyone who did not believe in what those scholars did was considered ghulat. It is only ghulat to hold any of those beliefs (besides the lack of Ali's death when it is clearly proven he was killed), if there is indeed no evidence to support them which is the basis for this whole thread.

If you go to Abdullah ibn Saba's Wikipedia page there is a section on whether he even existed historically with far more sources than the article you found, and the doubt about his historical authenticity among non-Muslim scholars who really have no interest as to the implications of his existence or non-existence should indicate how muddled the issue is. So statements such as, 'the first ghulat was Abdullah ibn Saba' cannot be seriously verified. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_ibn_Saba'#Historicity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raj'ah (someone dies and then Allah returns him back):

They shall say:' 'Our Lord! Thou hast cause us to die two deaths, and Thou hast given us twice to live; now we confess our sins. Is there any way to go forth? (40;11)

When will Allah give it life after its death? So Allah caused him to die for a hundred years, then raised him to life. (2; 259)

"Traditionally, the first of the ghulāt was Abd Allah ibn Sabaʾ, who may have denied that Ali had died and predicting his return (rajʿa),

Ibn Sabah (la) died before Ali (as) - ( He was killed by Ali (as))

Edited by Rasul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay...very interesting. Were there any Sahaba which believed in Ali (a.s.) divine appointment?

Salam

Yes there are. The central ones are refereed to as the four companions in which Shia's believe were one of the few companions that believed Imam Ali(as) had the right to the Khalifate than Abu Bakr after the prophet. These are their names. You can do a basic research on them on Al-Islam.org or even on wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Four_Companions

Aside from those four, Muhamed ibn Abu Bakr(ra) ; the son of Abu Bakr and the brother of Aisha, was also a prominent Sahabi of Imam Ali(as) and believed he had more rights over the khalifate than his father. In the battle of Jamal, he fully supported Imam Ali(as) against his sister ; Aisha and although he was her blood brother, was loyal enough to the Ahlulbayt to draw his sword and use it to attack her for the sake of Imam Ali(as) and his progeny.

Jabber ibn Abdullah Al-Ansary(ra) was also prominent sahabi of both Imam Ali(as) and the prophet(phub) since he lived during the time of the prophet and Imam Ali(as). He lived a very long life, from the time of the prophet till the time of the fifth Imam ; Imam Muhamed Baqir(as). There is a hadith written in both Sunni and Shia books where the prophet narrates by saying to Jabber that in the future, he will meet his grandson (referring to the fifth imam). I do not have the exact references but I will quote the summary of the narration from wikipedia. You can find the references in Tarikh Altabari from either Al-Islam.org or a sunni website. This is the story below:

"Jabir had a long life and became blind in his old age. But he devoutly waited for the time when he would meet the fifth Imam. Each morning he would come out from his house, sit by the roadside and wait for the sound of the footsteps to recognize the fifth Imam. One such day while he was waiting in the street of Medina, he heard someone walking towards him, the sound of footsteps reminded him of the way Muhammad used to walk. Jabir stood up, stopped the man and asked his name. He replied, “Muhammad”, Jabir asked, “whose son”? He replied “Ali ibn Hussain”. Jabir immediately recognized the man he was talking to was the 5th Imam. He kissed his hands and conveyed the message of Muhammad."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jabir_ibn_Abd-Allah

Malik ibn Nuwayrah(ra) was also one of the prominent Sahabis of Imam Ali(as). According to my knowledge, he was assigned by the prophet as a tax collector of his tribe and was always in contact of with the prophet and Imam Ali. When Abu Bakr became Caliph, Malik ibn Nuwayrah and his tribe did not recognize Abu Bakr as the rightful caliph as they believed that Imam Ali(as) was the chosen successor by the prophet that would come after him. Malik and his tribe rebelled fiercely towards Abu Bakr by refusing to pay the Zakat tax to him. As a result, Abu Bakr declared them as "rawafith" (rejecters), out of the fold of Islam and sent an army to attack them under the command of Khalid Ibn Walid. When Khalid ibn Walid reached their tribe, they killed almost everyone that opposed them. Moreover. When Khalid ibn Walid reached Malik Ibn Nuwayrah's home, he killed Malik, beheaded him and raped his wife and took her as a slave.

I hope this little info helped. Sorry for not providing the full references as I have midterms this week. If you have a question please message me.

fi aman illah

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...