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

Why Aren't The Ansar Worse Than Abubakr And Umar?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

But bro, there are chapters filled with ahadith on the merits of Ansar also in sunni books. Just because the no ansar is in the 10 promised list does not degrade their other merits which were not said for any muhajir I think.

Or are you only stating about the political leadership?

Yes I know bro I was only talking about their political standing

early muhajir and quraishi pre-requisites for leadership NOT a islamic prinicpal but of the 2 shaykhs

well aware of ahadith in merits of ansar e.g hating ansar is nifaq by zayd b arqam , anas b malik etc

I was under the impression that there are loads of condemnation made by Ameer ul Mumuneen (as) against the three Caliphs in other Shi'i sources other than Najhul Balaghah such as from Kutub Arbah.

Also in Kitab Sulaym bin Qais, you can see it.

No doubt, Ali (as) was not in perfect harmony with the policies of the Sheikhyn, they disagreed on many issues and it is well documented. However the issue on Sheikhn was not the immediate concern as Muawiya was stirring up fitna to say the least that Ali (as) has grudges for the sheikhyn but Ali (as) dismissed it, i was even surprised to see in KSQ that Imam ALi (as) prayed for Hz Umar (ra).

And one must ponder that Muawiya was first promoted under Caliph Abu Bakr (ra), and finally inherited the governorship from his brother Yazid, this was Hz Umar (ra) idea. He laid the foundation for Muawiya to raise in rank. The final death blow came with Hz Uthman (ra) consolidating two provinces under the governorship of Muawiya, making him master over a strong garrison city to the north of the empire.

Abubakr and Umar were putting the late converts in forefront of many of the conquests but there were several factors at work

1- not totally against the precendent set by prophet when he made khalid and amr b a'as commanders in his life time

2-Muawiyah and yazid were both from Abd shaams who were actually closer in kinship to banu hashim than abubakr/umar

3- Meccan converts regardless of their religiousity would atleast be expected to be loyal to Medina quraishi Govt and keep the provincial /sepratist mentalities of other arab tribes in check esp those of Yemen.We have already seen them rise up during times of Riddah wars

4-We suppose now with hindsight 20/20 that muaiwyah is the enemy of Ali in those early years there is no such indication infact the tribe of muaiwyah in post-fatah mekkah period is on generally good terms with banu hashim.See biography of Khalid b Saeed b A'as a ummayyad early convert who supported Ali over abubakr at the saqifa.I could be wrong but several hashimis lived in syria even during times of fitna and we all know of Aqeel's soujourn to syria in times of fitna which gave muawiyah opportunity to show off his hospitality to him.Point being muaiwyah and Ali were not by any means sworn enemies at the time of abubakr/umar rather were tribal allies

Umar would not let muawiyah have unchecked power ( unlike uthman) see the incident of Ubadah b Sammit

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 230
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I doubt this. Even Sunni sources record Imam Zayn ul-Abideen (as) being asked of his opinion on Abu Bakr and Umar, so clearly it must have been at least somewhat of an issue at the time. Yet this woul

Cave? :huh: Honestly where on earth do you people get this cave reference? I have not seen a single narration regarding the Imām inside a cave. You seem to use this concept so bring your proof if you

Reports of Imam Ali using Hadith Khum to call people to himself are lacking from sunni sources in the period of the 2 khalifa but they appear during the period of Uthman . The major sunni books that m

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member

@ Zigzag

Considering the fact they were the prophet's closest, oldest, wisest and most loyal "friends", they had the power to easily and effectively end any mutiny by any faction. But no, the weasels jumped at the chance knowing that the prophet appointed Ali (as) in their presence multiple times... didn't even bother to wash or help bury the prophet(pbuh&f).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

The ansars were just duped to provide the perfect opportunity to execute the plan by the 5 individuals and their allies.

what bro zigzag means is worse per Imami shia interpretation of events I dont think ( or hope ) that bro zigzag harbors any malice against ansar for opposing abubakr

do not think Quraishis are superior to Ansar and not degrading the latter either

Thats great the egalitarian islam has historically only been preached by the khawarij ( sadly ) Did Ali preach a banu hashim only right to leadership during his time of caliphate ? I'm not sure and not likely given a preponderence of non-quraishi and ansar supporters in his ranks.

I believe too that there is no islamic injuction mandating Quraish as only caliphs

abubakr/umar 's justification was a politically expedient measure which was kind of justfied at that time but should not become enshrined in religious laws although both shias and sunnis cling to it

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
And, Shias shout Ghadir Khum, why didn't the people refer to it? Did the have amnesia all of a sudden?

Reports of Imam Ali using Hadith Khum to call people to himself are lacking from sunni sources in the period of the 2 khalifa but they appear during the period of Uthman . The major sunni books that mentioned Imam Ali using hadith khum to call to himself during his rule are : Musnad Ahmad, assunan Alkubra for Nisa'i and Almustadrak for Alhakem. Imam Ali mentioned hadith khum in three occasions according to these three books. These occasions are:

1- In Rahbah

عن زاذان بن عمر ، قال : سمعت علياً في الرحبة ، وهو ينشد الناس : ( من شهد رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) يوم غدير خم وهو يقول ما قام ) .

فقام : ثلاثة عشر رجلاً ، فشهدوا أنّهم سمعوا رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) ، وهو يقول : ( من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه )

2- in Kufa Mosque

عن زيد بن يثيع ، قال : سمعت علي بن أبي طالب ، يقول على منبر الكوفة : ( إنّي منشد الله رجلاً ، ولا أنشد إلاّ أصحاب محمّد ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) : من سمع رسول الله يقول يوم غدير خم : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه

3- In Jamal battle :

حدّثنا رفاعة بن أياس الضبّي عن أبيه عن جدّه ، قال : كنا مع علي يوم الجمل ، فبعث إلى طلحة بن عبيد الله : ( أن القنا ) ، فأتاه طلحة ، فقال : ( نشدك الله هل سمعت رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) يقول : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Abubakr and Umar were putting the late converts in forefront of many of the conquests but there were several factors at work

1- not totally against the precendent set by prophet when he made khalid and amr b a'as commanders in his life time

2-Muawiyah and yazid were both from Abd shaams who were actually closer in kinship to banu hashim than abubakr/umar

3- Meccan converts regardless of their religiousity would atleast be expected to be loyal to Medina quraishi Govt and keep the provincial /sepratist mentalities of other arab tribes in check esp those of Yemen.We have already seen them rise up during times of Riddah wars

4-We suppose now with hindsight 20/20 that muaiwyah is the enemy of Ali in those early years there is no such indication infact the tribe of muaiwyah in post-fatah mekkah period is on generally good terms with banu hashim.See biography of Khalid b Saeed b A'as a ummayyad early convert who supported Ali over abubakr at the saqifa.I could be wrong but several hashimis lived in syria even during times of fitna and we all know of Aqeel's soujourn to syria in times of fitna which gave muawiyah opportunity to show off his hospitality to him.Point being muaiwyah and Ali were not by any means sworn enemies at the time of abubakr/umar rather were tribal allies

Wasnt it the policy of Hz Abu Bakr (ra) to include new converts from Quraish? it is true that Muawiya and Hz ALi (as) may not be enemies before, particularly when Abu Sufyan approached Hz Ali (as) to rebel against Hz Abu Bakr (ra).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Reports of Imam Ali using Hadith Khum to call people to himself are lacking from sunni sources in the period of the 2 khalifa but they appear during the period of Uthman . The major sunni books that mentioned Imam Ali using hadith khum to call to himself during his rule are : Musnad Ahmad, assunan Alkubra for Nisa'i and Almustadrak for Alhakem. Imam Ali mentioned hadith khum in three occasions according to these three books. These occasions are:

1- In Rahbah

عن زاذان بن عمر ، قال : سمعت علياً في الرحبة ، وهو ينشد الناس : ( من شهد رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) يوم غدير خم وهو يقول ما قام ) .

فقام : ثلاثة عشر رجلاً ، فشهدوا أنّهم سمعوا رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) ، وهو يقول : ( من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه )

2- in Kufa Mosque

عن زيد بن يثيع ، قال : سمعت علي بن أبي طالب ، يقول على منبر الكوفة : ( إنّي منشد الله رجلاً ، ولا أنشد إلاّ أصحاب محمّد ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) : من سمع رسول الله يقول يوم غدير خم : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه

3- In Jamal battle :

حدّثنا رفاعة بن أياس الضبّي عن أبيه عن جدّه ، قال : كنا مع علي يوم الجمل ، فبعث إلى طلحة بن عبيد الله : ( أن القنا ) ، فأتاه طلحة ، فقال : ( نشدك الله هل سمعت رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) يقول : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه

Thanks bro who is the primary narrater in these 3 situations ?

Is this the event when 6 or 7 companions including Abu Ayyub stood up to testify about Ghadeer ? and includes Abu fadalah ansari

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Wasnt it the policy of Hz Abu Bakr (ra) to include new converts from Quraish? it is true that Muawiya and Hz ALi (as) may not be enemies before, particularly when Abu Sufyan approached Hz Ali (as) to rebel against Hz Abu Bakr (ra).

Do the shias believe in this incident (the bolded part)? Do they have this narrated in their books?

Edited by Zigzag
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the shias believe in this incident (the bolded part)? Do they have this narrated in their books?

Its alluded to in Naghjul Balagha in one of the Imams sermons:

http://www.nahjulbalagha.org/SermonDetail.php?Sermon=5

and

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234958769-did-abu-sufyan-offer-help-to-imam-ali-as/

Edited by Vigilare
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Reports of Imam Ali using Hadith Khum to call people to himself are lacking from sunni sources in the period of the 2 khalifa but they appear during the period of Uthman . The major sunni books that mentioned Imam Ali using hadith khum to call to himself during his rule are : Musnad Ahmad, assunan Alkubra for Nisa'i and Almustadrak for Alhakem. Imam Ali mentioned hadith khum in three occasions according to these three books. These occasions are:

1- In Rahbah

عن زاذان بن عمر ، قال : سمعت علياً في الرحبة ، وهو ينشد الناس : ( من شهد رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) يوم غدير خم وهو يقول ما قام ) .

فقام : ثلاثة عشر رجلاً ، فشهدوا أنّهم سمعوا رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) ، وهو يقول : ( من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه )

2- in Kufa Mosque

عن زيد بن يثيع ، قال : سمعت علي بن أبي طالب ، يقول على منبر الكوفة : ( إنّي منشد الله رجلاً ، ولا أنشد إلاّ أصحاب محمّد ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) : من سمع رسول الله يقول يوم غدير خم : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه

3- In Jamal battle :

حدّثنا رفاعة بن أياس الضبّي عن أبيه عن جدّه ، قال : كنا مع علي يوم الجمل ، فبعث إلى طلحة بن عبيد الله : ( أن القنا ) ، فأتاه طلحة ، فقال : ( نشدك الله هل سمعت رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) يقول : من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه

Are there any references that Imam Ali stated that he was divinely chosen to be the successor during/after Abu Bakr's selection and during Umar's? Just like the Prophet was chosen by God as a divine agent and declared it, where are the references of Imam Ali declaring he is a divine agent?

Edited by Ugly Jinn
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Are there any references that Imam Ali stated that he was divinely chosen to be the successor during/after Abu Bakr's selection and during Umar's? Just like the Prophet was chosen by God as a divine agent and declared it, where are the references of Imam Ali declaring he is a divine agent?

The prophet was divinely chosen we all agree. The prophet doesn't have his own desire, we all agree. Everything the prophet did was what Allah commanded. Therefore when he selected Ali, we must agree Allah wanted it, therefore imam Ali is divinely chosen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Are there any references that Imam Ali stated that he was divinely chosen to be the successor during/after Abu Bakr's selection and during Umar's? Just like the Prophet was chosen by God as a divine agent and declared it, where are the references of Imam Ali declaring he is a divine agent?

Nahjul-Balagha sermon 144

Allah deputed prophets and distinguished them with His revelation. He made them as pleas for Him among His creation, so that there should not remain any excuse for people. He invited people to the right path through a truthful tongue. You should know that Allah fully knows creation. Not that He was not aware of what they concealed from among their hidden secrets and inner feelings, but in order to try them as to whom from among them performs good acts, so that there is reward in respect of good acts and chastisement in respect of evil acts.

The position of Ahlu'l-bayt (the Household of the Holy Prophet)

Where are those who falsely and unjustly claimed that they are deeply versed in knowledge, as against us, although Allah raised us in position and kept them down, bestowed upon us knowledge but deprived them, and entered us (in the fortress of knowledge) but kept them out. With us guidance is to be sought and blindness (of misguidance) is to be changed into brightness. Surely Imams (divine leaders) will be from the Quraysh. They have been planted in this line through Hashim. It would not suit others nor would others be suitable as heads of affairs.

A part of the same sermon about those who are against the Ahlu'l-bayt

They have adopted this world and abandoned the next world; left clean water and drunk stinking water. I can almost see their wicked one [1] who committed unlawful acts, associated himself with them, befriended them and accorded with them till his hair grew grey and his nature acquired their tinge. He proceeded onward emitting foam like a torrential stream not caring whom he drowned, or, like fire in straw, without realising what he burnt.

Where are the minds which seek light from the lamps of guidance, and the eyes which look at minarets of piety? Where are the hearts dedicated to Allah, and devoted to the obedience of Allah? They are all crowding towards worldly vanities and quarrelling over unlawful issues. The ensigns of Paradise and Hell have been raised for them but they have turned their faces away from Paradise and proceeded to Hell by dint of their performances. Allah called them but they showed dislike and ran away. When Satan called them they responded and proceeded (towards him).

Footnotes by translator:

[1].Here the reference is to `Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan who committed extreme atrocities through his officer al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf ath-Thaqafi.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Who originated the idea ? what idea ? who spoke softly to who?

Why would I compare this to Shirk? oh ... wait , actually you are right, the ones who deny Imamah are actually mushriks but you will not understand that though I am surprised that your subconscious has got it already.

Speaking of being soft on mushriks, did not Abu Bakr forgive the apostates, let them marry his sister? then those apostates became khawarij?

How soft do you think was the protest of Sydah Fatimah when she refuse to have public funeral or known grave?

Speaking about the Ansar, Sa'd b. Ubadah the man whom you are accusing of being worse than Abu Bakr and Umar, whom the saqifah happened in his presence and in his home, he did not give bay'ah to either Umar nor Abu Bakr, he was found dead after he declared his hatred to Umar. Sa'd b. Ubadah was the man whom prophet peace be upon him gave the flag during the wars, he carried the flag of Ansar while Imam Ali carried the flag of Muhajerin.

Maybe I am not articulate enough to put my argument across to you. However, many other users posting here have comprehended it and its sufficient. The whole purpose of the thread was to look at this issue from a shia mind set and with the shia imamate argument but you failed to grasp that in both your posts addressed to me.

Now, on the bolded parts above..

What is the shia opinion of Saad ibn Ubadah?

The flag bearer during the time of the Prophet wanted to be the imam/khalifah himself and arranged a meeting in his place and in his presence (your words). Did he believe in the 12 imam theory? Did he believe in wilayah of Ali r.a.?

The opinion of shias on sahabas keep shifting with whatever the argument is.

Edited by Zigzag
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I am not well versed in rijal, sorry if i cannot help you there.

Bro you have displayed a great grasp of historical works, reason I asked was because this version was quoted at that point IMHO

Abu Ya’la and Abd Allah b. Ahmad - in his father’s Musnad - related form `Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Layla through al-Qawariri, Yunus b. Arqam and Yazid b. Abi Ziyad, his saying: I was present at al-Ruhba when ‘Ali was imploring people saying: ‘I adjure you by Allah to stand up and bear witness if you had heard the Messenger of Allah saying on the day of Ghadir Khumm, ‘To whoever I am his master, ‘Ali is a master’. Abd al-Rahman went on: Twelve of the Badris (those who participated in the Battle of Badr) - I can recall one of them was wearing pants - stood up and bore witness that they all heard the Messenger of Allah saying on the day of Ghadir Khumm: ‘Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves, and that my wives are as their mothers?’ ‘Yes indeed!’ We said. He continued: ‘ Then, to whoever I am a master, ‘Ali is a master; ‘O Allah, love those who love him and be hostile to those who are hostile to him.’

I found this on a shia site and this incident is likely the most wellknown version of Ghadeer at the time of fitna, I was interested in the identity of the 12 people of badr who testified at that time.Is there a version of this incident where they are specifically mentioned by name ? if so does that include a certain Abu Fadalah Ansari ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Bro you have displayed a great grasp of historical works, reason I asked was because this version was quoted at that point IMHO

Abu Ya’la and Abd Allah b. Ahmad - in his father’s Musnad - related form `Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Layla through al-Qawariri, Yunus b. Arqam and Yazid b. Abi Ziyad, his saying: I was present at al-Ruhba when ‘Ali was imploring people saying: ‘I adjure you by Allah to stand up and bear witness if you had heard the Messenger of Allah saying on the day of Ghadir Khumm, ‘To whoever I am his master, ‘Ali is a master’. Abd al-Rahman went on: Twelve of the Badris (those who participated in the Battle of Badr) - I can recall one of them was wearing pants - stood up and bore witness that they all heard the Messenger of Allah saying on the day of Ghadir Khumm: ‘Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves, and that my wives are as their mothers?’ ‘Yes indeed!’ We said. He continued: ‘ Then, to whoever I am a master, ‘Ali is a master; ‘O Allah, love those who love him and be hostile to those who are hostile to him.’

I found this on a shia site and this incident is likely the most wellknown version of Ghadeer at the time of fitna, I was interested in the identity of the 12 people of badr who testified at that time.Is there a version of this incident where they are specifically mentioned by name ? if so does that include a certain Abu Fadalah Ansari ?

names from Milani book "Monashadah and Ihtijaj"

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A8/1603_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%BA%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%AC-%D9%A1

ـ أبو زينب بن عوف الأنصاري.

2 ـ أبو عمرة بن عمرو بن محصن الأنصاري.

3 ـ أبو فضالة الأنصاري: استشهد بصفين مع أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ـ بدري.

4 ـ أبو قدامة الأنصاري:الشهيد بصفين مع أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام.

5 ـ أبو ليلى الأنصاري: يقال: استشهد بصفين. (1)

6 ـ أبو هريرة الدوسي: المتوفى (57، 58، 59).

7 ـ أبو الهيثم بن التيهان: الشهيد بصفين ـ بدري.

8 ـ ثابت بن وديعة الأنصاري، الخزرجي، المدني.

9 ـ حبشي بن جنادة السلولي: شهد مع علي مشاهده.

10 ـ أبو أيوب خالد الأنصاري: المستشهد غازيا بالروم (50، 51، 52) ـ بدري.

11 ـ خزيمة بن ثابت الأنصاري، ذو الشهادتين: الشهيد يصفين ـ بدري.

12 ـ أبو شريح خويلد بن عمرو الخزاعي: المتوفى (68).

13 ـ زيد أو يزيد بن شراحيل الأنصاري.

14 ـ سهل بن حنيف الأنصاري، الأوسي: المتوفى (38) ـ بدري.

15 ـ أبو سعيد سعد بن مالك الخدري الأنصاري: المتوفى (63، 64، 65).

16 ـ أبو العباس سهل بن سعد الأنصاري المتوفى (91).

17 ـ عامر بن ليلى الغفاري.

18 ـ عبد الرحمن بن عبد رب الأنصاري.

19 ـ عبد الله بن ثابت الأنصاري: خادم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم.

20 ـ عبيد بن عازب الأنصاري: من العشرة الدعاة إلى الإسلام (12).

22 ـ عقبة بن عامر الجهني: المتوفى قرب الـ (60)، كان ممن يمت إلى معاوية.

23 ـ ناجية بن عمرو الخزاعي.

24 ـ نعمان بن عجلان الأنصاري: لسان الأنصار وشاعرهم.

Those witnessed In Rahbah right after Uthman death in the year 35 hijri

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ـ أبو الهيثم بن التيهان ـ بدري.

2 ـ أبو أيوب خالد بن زيد الأنصاري.

3 ـ حبيب بن بديل بن ورقاء الخزاعي.

4 ـ خزيمة بن ثابت ذو الشهادتين الشهيد بصفين ـ بدري.

5 ـ عبد الله بن بديل بن ورقاء الشهيد بصفين.

6 ـ عمار بن ياسر قتيل الفئة الباغية بصفين ـ بدري.

7 ـ قيس بن ثابت بن شماس الأنصاري.

8 ـ قيس بن سعد بن عبادة الخزرجي ـ بدري.

9 ـ هاشم المرقال ابن عتبة صاحب راية علي والشهيد بصفين.

Those who witnessed in Kufa in the year 36-37

-----------------------------------------------------

If you can read Arabic, you will find more details in that book.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
أبو فضالة الأنصاري: استشهد بصفين مع أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ـ بدري

Thats my man ! I think there is a dispute over who attended Badr and who didnt , I wish bro Macissac and other Rijal experts would comment more on him.He is a minor companion with a sparse biography but gets mention primarily wrt to Ghadeer in all sunni biographical dictionaries

Everyone was equal to them (as in those who they thought were Muslims) and they believed anyone could be Imam of the community as long as they were pious

Rustum dynasty of north africa ruled according to "khariji" principals and also a famous khariji Abu Hamza briefly held hijaz for sometime, he gives a great sermon where he is heavily critical of uthman Ali and Ummayyads whiles he extols Abubakr and Umar( and he surprisingly does not say that it was abubakr himself who supported the notion of Quraishi leadership of Ummah !) .Even though ALi was naturally the nemesis of khawarij after nahrawan , Abu Hamza is far more critical of muawiyah and ummayyads than of Ali.

Even though I clearly dont agree with Khawarij's crticism of Ali's stance at Nahrawan, I do agree with their stance that Quraish DOES not have the sole right to the leadership of the Ummah.What do the other members think about this issue ?

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

^ the other day I came accrose a Khariji book where it was written that they 'disassociate themselves from Uthman and Ali'.

They disassociate themselves from Sahaba especially the top ones just like the rawafid.

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Thats my man ! I think there is a dispute over who attended Badr and who didnt , I wish bro Macissac and other Rijal experts would comment more on him.He is a minor companion with a sparse biography but gets mention primarily wrt to Ghadeer in all sunni biographical dictionaries

Rustum dynasty of north africa ruled according to "khariji" principals and also a famous khariji Abu Hamza briefly held hijaz for sometime, he gives a great sermon where he is heavily critical of uthman Ali and Ummayyads whiles he extols Abubakr and Umar( and he surprisingly does not say that it was abubakr himself who supported the notion of Quraishi leadership of Ummah !) .Even though ALi was naturally the nemesis of khawarij after nahrawan , Abu Hamza is far more critical of muawiyah and ummayyads than of Ali.

Even though I clearly dont agree with Khawarij's crticism of Ali's stance at Nahrawan, I do agree with their stance that Quraish DOES not have the sole right to the leadership of the Ummah.What do the other members think about this issue ?

As per Shia school, Quraish is the bigger title which Banu Hashim comes under it. This is a piece of sermon in Nhj Albalagha where Imam Ali clearly explain this:

Where are those who falsely and unjustly claimed that they are deeply versed in knowledge, as against us, although Allah raised us in position and kept them down, bestowed upon us knowledge but deprived them, and entered us (in the fortress of knowledge) but kept them out. With us guidance is to be sought and blindness (of misguidance) is to be changed into brightness. Surely Imams (divine leaders) will be from the Quraysh. They have been planted in this line through Hashim. It would not suit others nor would others be suitable as heads of affairs

ان الائمة من قريش غرسوا في هذا البطن من هاشم

the Qurashi Imams (as if he is speaking about known set of Imams that people should be familiar with) where implanted in this branch of Quraish(bani Hashim) and for that the khilafah (imamat) will not be just by others than them . no just rulers will be from any tribe but from them(bani hashim)

بِنَا يُسْتَعْطَى الْهُدَى، وَبِنَا يُسْتَجْلَى الْعَمَى. إِنَّ الْأَئِمَّةَ مِنْ قُرَيشٍ غُرِسُوا فِي هذَا الْبَطْنِ مِنْ هَاشِمٍ، لاَ تَصْلُحُ عَلَى سِوَاهُمْ، وَلاَ تَصْلُحُ الْوُلاَةُ مِنْ غَيْرِهمْ.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

^ the other day I came accrose a Khariji book where it was written that they 'disassociate themselves from Uthman and Ali'.

They disassociate themselves from Sahaba especially the top ones just like the rawafid.

so disassociation from certain sahaba is a big sin ? according to whom ? and I thought the rawafid are misguided because of their bidah of Imamate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats my man ! I think there is a dispute over who attended Badr and who didnt , I wish bro Macissac and other Rijal experts would comment more on him.He is a minor companion with a sparse biography but gets mention primarily wrt to Ghadeer in all sunni biographical dictionaries

I didn't think there was a dispute - according to Tabari he fought at Badr and died in Siffeen on Ali's side. Saying that though, he's not mentioned here

http://www.ahlesunnat.net/media-library/downloads/regularupdates/battleofbadr.htm

Rustum dynasty of north africa ruled according to "khariji" principals and also a famous khariji Abu Hamza briefly held hijaz for sometime, he gives a great sermon where he is heavily critical of uthman Ali and Ummayyads whiles he extols Abubakr and Umar( and he surprisingly does not say that it was abubakr himself who supported the notion of Quraishi leadership of Ummah !) .Even though ALi was naturally the nemesis of khawarij after nahrawan , Abu Hamza is far more critical of muawiyah and ummayyads than of Ali.

Even though I clearly dont agree with Khawarij's crticism of Ali's stance at Nahrawan, I do agree with their stance that Quraish DOES not have the sole right to the leadership of the Ummah.What do the other members think about this issue ?

What was said by Abu Bakr and Umar at Saqifa wasn't a Prophetic command, but a political and pragmatic one that was apt for that time in order to preserve unity amongst the Muslims. As usuals though it's been taken out of context and made into some form of religious opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
I didn't think there was a dispute - according to Tabari he fought at Badr and died in Siffeen on Ali's side. Saying that though, he's not mentioned here

http://www.ahlesunna...attleofbadr.htm

THATs what i thought was strange esp since ibn hajar counts him as a Badri as well,

What was said by Abu Bakr and Umar at Saqifa wasn't a Prophetic command, but a political and pragmatic one that was apt for that time in order to preserve unity amongst the Muslims. As usuals though it's been taken out of context and made into some form of religious opinion

Indeed reminds me of the hadith in which Umar describes the events of saqifa, clearly it was a ad hoc measure which even Umar did not intend to be used as a precedent.Unfortunately Umar did not include any non-Quraishis in the shura which gave credence to the principle of Quraishi superority over other tribes.

As per Shia school, Quraish is the bigger title which Banu Hashim comes under it. This is a piece of sermon in Nhj Albalagha where Imam Ali clearly explain this:

Where are those who falsely and unjustly claimed that they are deeply versed in knowledge, as against us, although Allah raised us in position and kept them down, bestowed upon us knowledge but deprived them, and entered us (in the fortress of knowledge) but kept them out. With us guidance is to be sought and blindness (of misguidance) is to be changed into brightness. Surely Imams (divine leaders) will be from the Quraysh. They have been planted in this line through Hashim. It would not suit others nor would others be suitable as heads of affairs

ان الائمة من قريش غرسوا في هذا البطن من هاشم

the Qurashi Imams (as if he is speaking about known set of Imams that people should be familiar with) where implanted in this branch of Quraish(bani Hashim) and for that the khilafah (imamat) will not be just by others than them . no just rulers will be from any tribe but from them(bani hashim)

بِنَا يُسْتَعْطَى الْهُدَى، وَبِنَا يُسْتَجْلَى الْعَمَى. إِنَّ الْأَئِمَّةَ مِنْ قُرَيشٍ غُرِسُوا فِي هذَا الْبَطْنِ مِنْ هَاشِمٍ، لاَ تَصْلُحُ عَلَى سِوَاهُمْ، وَلاَ تَصْلُحُ الْوُلاَةُ مِنْ غَيْرِهمْ.

As far as I know all sons of AbuTalib all shared this view ? esp Ibn Abbas who was a staunch advocate of the fifth share of Prophets family.Does Ali mean in this sermon that ANYONE from Banu hashim suitable in character is a good candidate of leadership ? That explains the later schisims between the house of Ali and house of Abbas and the confusion fo their followers.

Do we have any news on the orientation of other male members of banu hashim and their attitude towards ALi ? We know from many sources that almost all male members of banu hashim also did not give Bayat to Abu Bakr for 6 months until Ali did so, Abbas and presumably his sons are specifically mentioned.Also sons of Abu Lahab ( Utba) is counted as opponent of AbuBakr, is there anything on views of sons of Harith and Zubayr ( brother of Abu Talib) in Imami sources ?

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

THATs what i thought was strange esp since ibn hajar counts him as a Badri as well,

Indeed reminds me of the hadith in which Umar describes the events of saqifa, clearly it was a ad hoc measure which even Umar did not intend to be used as a precedent.Unfortunately Umar did not include any non-Quraishis in the shura which gave credence to the principle of Quraishi superority over other tribes.

As far as I know all sons of AbuTalib all shared this view ? esp Ibn Abbas who was a staunch advocate of the fifth share of Prophets family.Does Ali mean in this sermon that ANYONE from Banu hashim suitable in character is a good candidate of leadership ? That explains the later schisims between the house of Ali and house of Abbas and the confusion fo their followers.

Do we have any news on the orientation of other male members of banu hashim and their attitude towards ALi ? We know from many sources that almost all male members of banu hashim also did not give Bayat to Abu Bakr for 6 months until Ali did so, Abbas and presumably his sons are specifically mentioned.Also sons of Abu Lahab ( Utba) is counted as opponent of AbuBakr, is there anything on views of sons of Harith and Zubayr ( brother of Abu Talib) in Imami sources ?

Hatha albatn min hashim = This bloodline from hashim which means not all the banu hashim but this particular blood line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

^ which would include which families? just sons of Ali or sons of AbuTalib ?

The children of the Prophet which includes children of Fatima A.S

-if that is what the brother was trying to say.

Edited by PureEthics
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

The children of the Prophet which includes children of Fatima A.S

-if that is what the brother was trying to say.

so Ali is refering only to the progeny of fatima ? and himself as entitled to leadership or banu hashim in general ( or banu abdul muttalib)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

so Ali is refering only to the progeny of fatima ? and himself as entitled to leadership or banu hashim in general ( or banu abdul muttalib)

Imam Ali is entitled to lead the whole Ummah, not only his tribe. He is saying that the 12 leaders (the should be known 12 leaders back then) who should lead the whole Muslims are from this specific linage from banu Hashim who are embedded in Quraish.

Ansar cannot claim khilafah, they have no right to do so. Quraish have no right to claim khilafah unless they are banu hashim. Banu Hashim have no right to claim khilafah unless they are from Ali linage. Ali progeny have no right to claim khilafah unless they are children of Fatimah, grandchildren of prophet.

Shia are not limiting khilafah to wordily issues nor limiting khilafah to spiritual field. Shia as well (unlike Zaidis) do not impose their own standards on who should be the khalifah nor what the khalifah should do. If khalifah called for war, shia should follow without objection, like in the case of Imam Ali calling the Kufan for war but they were lazy. If Khalifah called for a truce like in the case of Imam Hassan, he should not be called the Muthil Almo'menin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

^ but bro likes of sahaba hujr b adi, suleiman b sured and adi b hatim called hassan "one who humiliates the faithful" as they were understandably upset over the truce with muawiyah, they were elders of Hasan and treated him like their own son.They were not unfaithful to cause of ALi's family they were just upset about Hasan's apparent "weakness" unlike the uncompromising stance of his father.

Ali's supporters the Iraqis and medinians were not like the paid mercenaries of muawiyah, they had a mind of their own and only followed ALi as they considered him a legitimate moral leader when they had doubts about his leadership they refrained from following him ( even some of the staunch ones like I remeber reading the incident of Jundab b zuhayr [ abdullah ] doubts before battle of nahrawan in Kitab Irshad) however they cannot all be called lazy and traitors either, as many of them had battle fatigue and some others were confused by politics of the ummayyads.With hindsight always being 20/20 its very easy for us to criticize them for their unconditional support for Ali however try living in those times and the pciture is more murky, and ummayyads supporters since they backed muawiyah for worldly reasosn they had more clarity of purpose and seemed more loyal to their leader.

Banu Hashim have no right to claim khilafah unless they are from Ali linage. Ali progeny have no right to claim khilafah unless they are children of Fatimah, grandchildren of prophet

does Ali say that anywhere ?.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...