Some Shiites Hate Towards The Sahaba, Why?

[Sunniislam]

Salam Aleikum to you all!

In this post i want to know why "a part" of the shiites hate the sahaba's of the prophet (saws).

I know that the shiites think that a big part of the sahabs were disbelief or deviants, which offcause is not the truth..

Why does you talk bad about the wife of the prophet, Aisha (ra) ?? Do you really think, that the prophet (saws) would be happy about your behavour? Do you think Allah (SWT) is pleased with your cursing over the sahaba's? Do you think your a better muslim than the people closes to the prophet (saws)?

How would you stand in front of Allah (SWT) at the judgments day and say that your not acknowledges the people that he has protected and blessed?

Wa Salam

[Muslim2010]

Shia do not have blind eye view on the companions of the prophet, there were righteous companions like Ibne Abbbass, Salman Farsi, Abuzar ghafari, Huzaifa yamanai, and similar ones. They followed the prophet in their life and even after his demise.

There were companions who were not sincere in their actions in the life of the prophet and even after his demise their actions were not according to Islam.

There were others who openly violated the laws and rules of islam and they became apostate after the demise of the prophet. They killed the thousands of innocent muslims and made innovations in religion.The traditions inside bukhari confirm this fact.

This is the difference of opinion. There is no hate present for all of the companions. The Quran and hadith has outlined the path of the religion and prophet has ordered ummah to follow the quran and ahl al bayat. This is the most authentic source for following the holy prophet and the religion.

Edited April 29, 2013 by skamran110

[Yabnul_Taha]

We don't hate "the companions". We just don't think that meeting the Prophet (pbuh) makes you infallible. There are good and bad people. There are good and bad "Muslims". And there are good and bad companions. We try not to paint them all with the same brush; good or bad. Doing so would be a great injustice.

[The Green Knight]

So we criticize some sahaba who did wrong. Tell us why anyone shouldn't criticize the reportedly evil ones among the sahaba? This is the most important question here for Sunnis to consider.

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

Salam Aleikum to you all!

Do you think your a better muslim than the people closes to the prophet (saws)?

Wa Salam

Waleykum salaam,

Shia think they are even better than the Prophet (saw). They (Shia) know what was in the heart of Sahaba but the Prophet (saw) didn't know. They claim they were hypocrites but the Prophet (saw) didn't know. The Prophet (saw) who lived with them all his life didn't know but the Shia know.

We don't hate "the companions". We just don't think that meeting the Prophet (pbuh) makes you infallible. There are good and bad people. There are good and bad "Muslims". And there are good and bad companions. We try not to paint them all with the same brush; good or bad. Doing so would be a great injustice.

So we criticize some sahaba who did wrong. Tell us why anyone shouldn't criticize the reportedly evil ones among the sahaba? This is the most important question here for Sunnis to consider.

Sunnis don't claim Sahaba were infallible. Not being infallible doesn't mean 'apostate' or 'hypocrite' as Shia say about the Sahaba.

You claim majority of them were hypocrites/apostates (except few) including Abubakr (ra) and Umar (ra).

You said "There are bad and good Sahaba". There were Sahaba who committed sins but to say that majority of them turned apostates/hypocrites is indeed enmity towards the Prophet (saw) and his Sunnah for the Sahaba were those who narrated his Sunnah. Not only they are called apostates/hypocrites but the worst of creatures even worst than Iblees as I have seen Shia scholars say it.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Abul Hussain Hassani

[Zigzag]

Its not some sahaba but almost all minus a few. You can literally count the people which shia consider sahaba on your fingers. This "hating-just-some-sahaba" game is to make themselves more logical and rational.

- For sunnis, people supporting and helping the Prophet are sahabis. Sunnis believe most people were sahabis and munafiqs less in number.

- For shias, people supporting and helping Ali are "real" sahabis. Shias believe most people were munafiqs and sahabis were less in number.

[Haydar Husayn]

Salam Aleikum to you all!

In this post i want to know why "a part" of the shiites hate the sahaba's of the prophet (saws).

I know that the shiites think that a big part of the sahabs were disbelief or deviants, which offcause is not the truth..

Why does you talk bad about the wife of the prophet, Aisha (ra) ?? Do you really think, that the prophet (saws) would be happy about your behavour? Do you think Allah (SWT) is pleased with your cursing over the sahaba's? Do you think your a better muslim than the people closes to the prophet (saws)?

How would you stand in front of Allah (SWT) at the judgments day and say that your not acknowledges the people that he has protected and blessed?

Wa Salam

What do you think of the companions of Musa (as)? Where they all good people?

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

What do you think of the companions of Musa (as)? Where they all good people?

He is talking about the Companions of the last Prophet (saw).

[Logical Islamic]

We shia's do not hate the companions of Muhammed pbuh. Rather, we follow what the Holy Quran tells us.

The Quran groups the companions into catagories - those who are truthful and stay true to Islam, the hypocrites, the ones who may turn their backs when Muhammed pbuh dies and so on. In the glorious Quran, we even see that the followers of Musa a.s., the ones who were saved by Allah swt through Musa a.s., saw the two sea's split , but still disobeyed Musa a.s and worshipped the golden calf.

Does this mean we have to hate the thabba unconditionally? Ofcourse it doesn't. It would be disgusting for us to insult the loyal companions of Muhammed pbuh. However, in light of what the Quran teachs us, instead of saying 'we love all the companions', we say 'let us examine what each and every companion has done, before and after the death of Muhammed pbuh, and then we will make our judgements on the companions based on their own merit and loyalty.

We love many companions, some of them are Salman-al-farsi, Abu Dharr, Miqdad , may Allah swt be pleased with them. But we do not unconditionally follow all of them.

I will quote a hadith from Al Bukhari:

"On the Day of Resurrection I will be standing beside the pool of Kawthar, waiting for those who will come to me. I will see some of them separating and moving away from me, and I will ask, Are they not from among my Companions?' I will be told, 'Yes, but you do not know how they turned back to their previous ways after your death."

al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, "Kitab al-Fitan

[Haydar Husayn]

He is talking about the Companions of the last Prophet (saw).

I know, but I don't see what argument is being presented that wouldn't just as well apply to companions of other prophets.

[Rasul]

أَخْبَرَنَا مَحْمُودُ بْنُ غَيْلاَنَ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا وَكِيعٌ، وَوَهْبُ بْنُ جَرِيرٍ، وَأَبُو دَاوُدَ عَنْ شُعْبَةَ، عَنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ بْنِ النُّعْمَانِ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قَالَ قَامَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِالْمَوْعِظَةِ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّكُمْ مَحْشُورُونَ إِلَى اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ عُرَاةً ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ ‏"‏ حُفَاةً غُرْلاً ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَقَالَ وَكِيعٌ وَوَهْبٌ ‏"‏ عُرَاةً غُرْلاً ‏{‏ كَمَا بَدَأْنَا أَوَّلَ خَلْقٍ نُعِيدُهُ ‏}‏ قَالَ أَوَّلُ مَنْ يُكْسَى يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِبْرَاهِيمُ عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ وَإِنَّهُ سَيُؤْتَى ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ ‏"‏ يُجَاءُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ وَقَالَ وَهْبٌ وَوَكِيعٌ ‏"‏ سَيُؤْتَى بِرِجَالٍ مِنْ أُمَّتِي فَيُؤْخَذُ بِهِمْ ذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ فَأَقُولُ رَبِّ أَصْحَابِي ‏.‏ فَيُقَالُ إِنَّكَ لاَ تَدْرِي مَا أَحْدَثُوا بَعْدَكَ فَأَقُولُ كَمَا قَالَ الْعَبْدُ الصَّالِحُ ‏{‏ وَكُنْتُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا مَا دُمْتُ فِيهِمْ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّيْتَنِي ‏}‏ إِلَى قَوْلِهِ ‏{‏ وَإِنْ تَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ ‏}‏ الآيَةَ فَيُقَالُ إِنَّ هَؤُلاَءِ لَمْ يَزَالُوا مُدْبِرِينَ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ ‏"‏ مُرْتَدِّينَ عَلَى أَعْقَابِهِمْ مُنْذُ فَارَقْتَهُمْ

It was narrated that Ibn 'Abbas said:

"The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) stood up to give an admonition and he said: 'O people, you will be gathered to Allah naked."' (One of the narrators) Abu Dawud said: "Barefoot and uncircumcised." (The narrators) Waki' and Wahb said: "Naked and uncircumcised: As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it.'' The first one to be clothed on the Day of Resurrection will be Ibrahim, peace be upon him. Then some men from among my Ummah will be brought and will be taken toward the left.^[1] I will say: 'O Lord, my companions.' It will be said: 'You do not know what they innovated after you were gone.' And I shall say what the righteous slave said: 'And I was witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but 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.' And it will be said: 'These people kept turning away since you left them."'

Comments:

''To the left'' means they will be driven toward Hell. The denizens of Hell have been called the As'habush Shimal: the people of the left.

Footnote:

_______________

^[1] Meaning, toward Hell.

______________________

Sunni - Salafi References:

Source: Sunan an Nasa'i by Imam Nasa'i, Volume 3, page 153-154, Hadith Number # 2089

Grading: ( Sahih )

Grading of Imam Albani: ( Sahih )

Edited April 30, 2013 by Rasul

[Muslim2010]

More information on the companions and their apostacy can be found on this link:

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/235012998-following-the-companions/

[The Green Knight]

Sunnis don't claim Sahaba were infallible. Not being infallible doesn't mean 'apostate' or 'hypocrite' as Shia say about the Sahaba.

You don't? Don't you guys believe in the weak and illogical narrations like 'ishra mubashra that guarantees paradise to 10 of them? Why is your religion's name "Ahl-us-Sunnah wa al-Jamaat". What makes that particular little jamaat and their ways so imperative that you must add their sunnah to the sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh)? Isn't the latter, the sunnah of the Prophet, enough for you? And why not? Don't you believe in the Qur'an when it says that it already perfected your religion that you must follow the innovations of that Jamaat?

You claim majority of them were hypocrites/apostates (except few) including Abubakr (ra) and Umar (ra).

Were those two the immaculate ones then? And how, since your own books and later scholars speak of their villainy, hypocrisy, animosity to Islam and of their grave sins?

You said "There are bad and good Sahaba". There were Sahaba who committed sins but to say that majority of them turned apostates/hypocrites is indeed enmity towards the Prophet (saw)

How? Instead of a rhapsodical answer I recommend logic and reasoning.

and his Sunnah

On the contrary, your own books describe the demolition of His (pbuh) sunnah at the hands of those Sahaba.

for the Sahaba were those who narrated his Sunnah.

Then why was it all recorded by narrators and collectors that appeared 300 years later? Short on paper back then? No. Rather your own books explain very well and each one of you can very well find out and understand by reading them if only you were also honest. And then your kind could realize, as many of you have, that the Shia are only quoting your own books to you. Why do you expect villain worship from others?

Not only they are called apostates/hypocrites but the worst of creatures even worst than Iblees as I have seen Shia scholars say it.

Even if accept what you're saying, so what? One of your own Imams (Hanbal?) compared Abu Bakr to Iblees. The "Sahaba" and that particular one Umm-ul-momineen (out of how many?) who became your second biggest hadith narrating source in her early teens, all of them themselves used call each other kafir. Whats worse, they even killed each other and other sahaba. Umar beat up many of them. Umar's tongue said the vilest of things about them. Especially his profane language he used during Saqeefa should be noted. His tongue didn't even spare the holy Prophet even as he would often blaspheme. Everyone disliked to see him because of his bad manners back then. Uthman killed several sahabis. Muawiya killed 63. Khalid killed his own share and raped wives of believers. ALL of the above are STILL found in the oldest of Islamic and Sunni books in vast abundance. Not exactly angelic conduct, is it?

We take our religion from the Qur'an, holy Prophet (pbuh) himself, Imam Ali (as), all his most blessed 12 direct descendants and their representatives. We adhere to the thaqalayn. While your religion hinges entirely upon weak narrations from the horse's mouth. And you openly discourage the study and research of the Qur'an because it is entirely against your religion and practices. I know. I am a ex-sunni.

We are a people that came centuries before you. Before you were the four schools. Before them were the Mu'tazilli. Before them were the Qadiriyya and the Jabriyya. And now after 1400 years, having abandoned the source of guidance, the blessed ahl-al-bayt (as), you take yet another form and have the same bones to pick and lame objections, building upon which you seek blood and barbarism.

We are a people with a reputation and a standing in the world. Our religion is solid and the best there is. You are most welcome to criticize all you want, and for another 1400 years and do whatever you do. We have an afterlife, which is ours. Do you? What do you have that you try to invite people to? Umar? Abu Bakr? "Sahah" Sittah? Abu Huraira? Your futile "jihads"? Your desolate ruins of countries? Your pathetic and dwindling societies? Your services rendered to the satanic West and Israel? Seriously, preach to your own people first. Like all your previous forms it is evident that you lot are soon going to invent a newer religion. The latest one founded after 1918 by Aale Saud is also about to die out, as all baatil is destined to die out.

Find better, logical and legged subjects for creation of contempt if you must.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Darth Vader

[Abu Tufayl]

بسم الله

So, in order for this all the make sense to you, you would first have to understand what we believe. First of all, forget about Sunnism, that stuff is foreign, do not maintain the same presumptions.

We believe that the Prophet [sawa] appointed Imam Ali [as] as the authority over the believers in the same authority he [sawa] has (meaning his obedience is a divine command, not giving him Prophethood or New/continued revelation). So with this belief in mind, it would become obvious to anyone who held this that those who opposed him [as], took his right as the political leader (as that is part of the authority the Prophet [sawa] had) are usurpers and they have deviated. This would also include those who were not loyal to this cause afterwards. Same goes for `Aisha - she fought the person who the Prophet [sawa] had appointed by the command of Allah [swt] as the authority after him. We do not recognize the claims that she wanted revenge for Uthman nor do we recognize her supposed repentance.

So to us, it is nothing but obviously clear that those such people deserve to be hated and dissociated from. We do not hate "all the companions." We just don't praise all the companions. To us, the Companions were just other followers and they have no special role or complete knowledge of the Sunnah and the religion. We do not pre-assume the righteousness of anyone who met the Prophet [sawa] and said the Shahada and died that way, nor do we presume that they knew what they were talking about or doing or that they know the religion best equally. This goes for all people (aside from those considered divinely appointed and ma`sum), even the Tabi`een.

Just as you love those people for the sake of Allah [swt] on your tradition, we hate some people for the sake of Allah [swt].

Remeber, I am not here to debate the above points being true/untrue, so don't bother (anyone) responding in disputing in that way, but feel free to ask questions. I merely want to get across that within the tradition and its logic, it is consistent and we have come to that conclusion sincerely.

في أمان الله

Edited April 30, 2013 by Dar'ul_Islam

[Ugly Jinn]

The whole "sahaba" argument from a Shia point of view revolves around Imam Ali, plain and simple, nothing to do with the Prophet. Overwhelming majority of Muslims (Prophet's followers) did not support Imam Ali, hence by default the Shias have to discredit or dislike practically all the followers of the Prophet.

If Imam Ali was supported by the majority this would be a non-issue - Shias would claim majority of sahabas were good.

Edited May 1, 2013 by Ugly Jinn

[akramabbas]

The whole "sahaba" argument from a Shia point of view revolves around Imam Ali, plain and simple, nothing to do with the Prophet. Overwhelming majority of Muslims (Prophet's followers) did not support Imam Ali, hence by default the Shias have to discredit or dislike practically all the followers of the Prophet.

If Imam Ali was supported by the majority this would be a non-issue - Shias would claim majority of sahabas were good.

(salam)

that does not make sense. I am totally disagreed with bold point. We only dislike those sahabas, who did not like Imam Ali (as) after Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) demise. We only respect and like those who loved Ali because Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) said, "Ali is with the truth and the truth is with 'Ali;"

We are only with Haq(Truth). We like other sahabi (ra) i.e. Hazrat Bilal (ra) etc who were honest with Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) and also with Imam Ali (as), after Prophet Mohammad (pbuh).

And your first statement really don't not make sense. There are many possibility majority people go astray after a leader demise. It is Sunni who respect and like each and every Sahabi of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) without getting into deep information about them. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) already informed there are few Sahabi who are hypocrites.

what do you say about this?

Hadith

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount." 'Abdullah added: The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and then they will be taken away from me and I will say, 'O Lord, my companions!' It will be said, 'You do not know what they did after you had left.'

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8 Hadith 578

Hadith

The Prophet said, “Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognise them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, ‘My companions!’ Then it will be said, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8 Hadith 584 (also Sahih Muslim, part 15, pp 53-54)

so it clearly saying there were few sahabi who were Hypocrites. So hence not all the Sahabis are good, but few are not good.

Edited May 1, 2013 by akramabbas

[Ebn Tie me yeah]

The whole "sahaba" argument from a Shia point of view revolves around Imam Ali, plain and simple, nothing to do with the Prophet. Overwhelming majority of Muslims (Prophet's followers) did not support Imam Ali, hence by default the Shias have to discredit or dislike practically all the followers of the Prophet.

If Imam Ali was supported by the majority this would be a non-issue - Shias would claim majority of sahabas were good.

Oh my o my, this sahaba thing is blown out of proportion, there is a big difference between what we regard as sahaba and those that you regard, even a drunkard is known as sahabi to you, your scholars simply plucked out of thin air, that the sahaba are those who have seen me and believed in me and people of the later generation must follow me, show me atleast one verse from the Quran or Ahadith?

where is quality of companionship? you people say big things "sahaba" Ahl Sunnah" blah blah but most of the authentic narration rests on 4 individuals, Ayesha, Abu Huraira, Ibn Umar & Anas Malik. So this 4 people represent the entire system of Islam and they are sufficient for the vast 800 million muslims? How many narration from the Shi'a of Ali like Ammar ibn Yassir, Malik Al-Ashtar?

Or even Miqdad?

Islam of the 4 people, what a deception, Ahl Sunnah..

[Haydar Husayn]

The whole "sahaba" argument from a Shia point of view revolves around Imam Ali, plain and simple, nothing to do with the Prophet. Overwhelming majority of Muslims (Prophet's followers) did not support Imam Ali, hence by default the Shias have to discredit or dislike practically all the followers of the Prophet.

If Imam Ali was supported by the majority this would be a non-issue - Shias would claim majority of sahabas were good.

And if the followers of Musa (as) had followed Haroon (as), rather than worshiping an idol, then they would be good too. You are just stating the obvious. Do you think that those who went against the Prophet (pbuh) in his lifetime aren't condemned by Shias? If anything, it's the Sunnis that defend these people, such as Abu Sufyan, Hind, `Abdullah ibn Sa`d, Marwan ibn al-Hakam (and his father), etc.

[Ali-Reza]

Prophet (pbuh) had many Sahabas...Allah (swt) may have forgiven them and rewarded them for their early work in Islam but that doesn't make them Caliphs or rulers or teachers of Islam.

Only Ahlulbayt (as) are the true authority and teachers of Islam. So those of Sahahbas that were pro Ahlulbayt are to be respected and those that were against them not to be respected.

Allah (swt) says in Quran truth and falsehood are two different thing you tell me, which one do you support? Aisha or Imam Ali (as) in battle of Jammal.

[Ugly Jinn]

The whole "sahaba" argument from a Shia point of view revolves around Imam Ali, plain and simple, nothing to do with the Prophet. Overwhelming majority of Muslims (Prophet's followers) did not support Imam Ali, hence by default the Shias have to discredit or dislike practically all the followers of the Prophet.

that does not make sense. I am totally disagreed with bold point. We only dislike those sahabas, who did not like Imam Ali (as) after Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) demise. We only respect and like those who loved Ali because Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) said, "Ali is with the truth and the truth is with 'Ali;"

I rest my case.

There are many possibility majority people go astray after a leader demise. It is Sunni who respect and like each and every Sahabi of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) without getting into deep information about them. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) already informed there are few Sahabi who are hypocrites.

what do you say about this?

So you admit that the Prophet there are only few sahabas that were hypocrites, and there were hundreds and thousands of sahabas, hence majority were good. You agree?

Oh my o my, this sahaba thing is blown out of proportion, there is a big difference between what we regard as sahaba and those that you regard, even a drunkard is known as sahabi to you, your scholars simply plucked out of thin air, that the sahaba are those who have seen me and believed in me and people of the later generation must follow me, show me atleast one verse from the Quran or Ahadith?

where is quality of companionship? you people say big things "sahaba" Ahl Sunnah" blah blah but most of the authentic narration rests on 4 individuals, Ayesha, Abu Huraira, Ibn Umar & Anas Malik. So this 4 people represent the entire system of Islam and they are sufficient for the vast 800 million muslims? How many narration from the Shi'a of Ali like Ammar ibn Yassir, Malik Al-Ashtar?

Or even Miqdad?

We are talking about all the hundreds and thousands of sahabas, not cherry picking certain individuals. Shias basically claim practically all the sahabas went astray.

Shias can't judge hundreds of thousands of sahabas based on few individuals hence use the issue of caliphate (majority not supporting Imam Ali) as the excuse to claim all of the sahabas, practically overnight, went astray.

And if the followers of Musa (as) had followed Haroon (as), rather than worshiping an idol, then they would be good too. You are just stating the obvious. Do you think that those who went against the Prophet (pbuh) in his lifetime aren't condemned by Shias? If anything, it's the Sunnis that defend these people, such as Abu Sufyan, Hind, `Abdullah ibn Sa`d, Marwan ibn al-Hakam (and his father), etc.

Examples..?

Musa/Haroon example is flawed. The followers of Musa rejected God, religion, Musa all together, the followers of the Prophet did not reject Allah, Islam, nor Muhammed. They just didn't support your 'leader' at the time, hence have been portrayed as hypocrites, deviant, ignorant, etc.

To your later point, I repeat, we are talking about the majority (hundreds of thousands), not few individuals here and there. Claiming that practically all were ignorant or went astray overnight yet remaining Muslims just doesn't make sense.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Ugly Jinn

[akramabbas]

So you admit that the Prophet there are only few sahabas that were hypocrites, and there were hundreds and thousands of sahabas, hence majority were good. You agree?

yes. few sahabas were hypocrites and showed real face after Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

check this list... http://en.wikipedia....w_of_the_Sahaba

Check Believers, Not Sincere, Hypocrites. Here you can see Majority were good, but then majority (except of Believers list) of them also went to astray after those three made a Ruling system. It is a leader, whom people are with. And Abu Bakar was a Caliph after Prophet Muhammad. So majority of with them. They could not do anything except accepting Abu Bakar. It was not Abu Bakar right to make a Ruling System and even Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) never declared Abu Bakar as his next successor etc.

One thing I want to tell you many more times, We love Sahabas, but only those who supported Maula Ali. Because Maula Ali (as) is the only Sahabi of Rasool (pbuh) who was very near to Rasool (pbuh). But strange thing is that there are a very few hadiths narrated by Maula Ali (as) in Sunni books.

Hadith

A Sunni historian Al-Yaqubi mentions in Tarikh al-Yaqubi,

"A numbers of migrants and the helpers refused to swear allegiance to Abu Bakr, inclined as they were to favor Ali ibn AbuTalib. Al Abbas bin Abd al-Muttalib, Al-Fadi bin Al-Abbas, Al Zuhayr, Khalid bin Said, Al Miqdad, Salman the Persian, Abu Zar Ghaffari, Ammar ibn Yasir, Al-Bara'a, Ubayy bin Ka'b were part of this group". Tarikh al-Yaqubi 2. p. 114.

I also rest my case now, it is up to you love Hazrat Ali (as) or Abu Bakar. Loving both is not possible. But sorry brother, I can't love Abu Bakr who did not respect Ahl-e-Bait (as). I can't love an enemy of my love.

I agree they used to behave nicely with Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) but they went astray after Prophet demise. I shared with you a Hadith. but you did not say anything about the Hadith. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) already knew there are some sahabis who are hypocrites.

The Prophet said, “Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognise them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, ‘My companions!’ Then it will be said, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you.”

And you know very well who innovated (new things) in the religion after Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

also read this Hadith

The Prophet said, "While I was sleeping, a group (of my followers were brought close to me), and when I recognized them, a man (an angel) came out from amongst (us) me and them, he said (to them), 'Come along.' I asked, 'Where?' He said, 'To the (Hell) Fire, by Allah' I asked, 'what is wrong with them' He said, 'They turned apostate as renegades after you left.' Then behold! (Another) group (of my followers) were brought close to me, and when I recognized them, a man (an angel) came out from (me and them) he said (to them); Come along.' I asked, "Where?' He said, 'To the (Hell) Fire, by Allah.' I asked, What is wrong with them?' He said, 'They turned apostate as renegades after you left. So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd."

Hadith 587 (Volume 8) - Sahih Bukhari

My question to you I want to know those Sahabas name who are mentioned in these Hadiths. Who went astray? according to Sunni, all Sahabas were good. If yes, then why there are Hadith against Sahabas? I am just proving you from Sunni Hadiths from 'Sahih' named books. There are still more Hadiths which confirm All sahabas were not good.

Hence my point is cleared All sahabas were not good.

Real Sahabi (ra) is the one who loves another Sahabi of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) without being jealous etc. But the real fact is those three loved only themselves but not pious Sahabi (ra).

I ask another question. Why should I love Abu Bakar? only because he was Caliph? I have a couple of reasons loving Maula Ali. What those three sahabis did for Islam? only became Caliphs without permission of Holy Prophet (pbuh). You know very well Umar innovated many things in Islam. So, why should I love a person who changes things in Islam. Was Islam not completed in lifetime of Prophet Muhammad?

Edited May 2, 2013 by akramabbas

[The Green Knight]

Musa/Haroon example is flawed. The followers of Musa rejected God, religion, Musa all together, the followers of the Prophet did not reject Allah, Islam, nor Muhammed.

All the evidence is against what you say. They destroyed the sunnah and innovated new things while the Qur'an had perfected the deen during the life of the holy Prophet (pbuh). They are arch enemies of Allah, Muhammad (pbuh), Islam and all things lawful, moral and good. Your own books are full of evidences of their countless crimes. So on what basis, other than the usual Sunni rhapsody, do you lie?

[Ebn Tie me yeah]

We are talking about all the hundreds and thousands of sahabas, not cherry picking certain individuals. Shias basically claim practically all the sahabas went astray.

Shias can't judge hundreds of thousands of sahabas based on few individuals hence use the issue of caliphate (majority not supporting Imam Ali) as the excuse to claim all of the sahabas, practically overnight, went astray.

Lets get down to the basics, where on earth did you get the definition of sahabi? hundreds and thousands of sahaba, how did you reach the conclusion on the number? did the Ahle Sunnah develop a sophisticated registry for all the sahaba or can you give the number of sahaba according to your school?

The one extending the definition wide open is your sect and again it is your sect which cherry picked narrations for your sahehyn.

Tell me before we start arguing on facts, how do you define a sahabi and from where did you find it? and tell me how many sahaba are there?

[Abul Hussain Hassani]

And if the followers of Musa (as) had followed Haroon (as), rather than worshiping an idol, then they would be good too. You are just stating the obvious. Do you think that those who went against the Prophet (pbuh) in his lifetime aren't condemned by Shias? If anything, it's the Sunnis that defend these people, such as Abu Sufyan, Hind, `Abdullah ibn Sa`d, Marwan ibn al-Hakam (and his father), etc.

Musa/Haroon example is flawed. The followers of Musa rejected God, religion, Musa all together, the followers of the Prophet did not reject Allah, Islam, nor Muhammed. They just didn't support your 'leader' at the time, hence have been portrayed as hypocrites, deviant, ignorant, etc.

To your later point, I repeat, we are talking about the majority (hundreds of thousands), not few individuals here and there. Claiming that practically all were ignorant or went astray overnight yet remaining Muslims just doesn't make sense.

Exactly, that example is flawed and Quran supports what you said.

Allah says about the followers of Musa (as):

وَإِذْ أَخَذْنَا مِيثَاقَكُمْ وَرَفَعْنَا فَوْقَكُمُ الطُّورَ خُذُوا مَا آتَيْنَاكُم بِقُوَّةٍ وَاسْمَعُوا ۖ قَالُوا سَمِعْنَا وَعَصَيْنَا وَأُشْرِبُوا فِي قُلُوبِهِمُ الْعِجْلَ بِكُفْرِهِمْ ۚ قُلْ بِئْسَمَا يَأْمُرُكُم بِهِ إِيمَانُكُمْ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ

And [recall] when We took your covenant and raised over you the mount, [saying], "Take what We have given you with determination and listen." They said [instead], "We hear and disobey." And their hearts absorbed [the worship of] the calf because of their disbelief. Say, "How wretched is that which your faith enjoins upon you, if you should be believers." [baqarah: 93]

But says the opposite about the companions and followers of the last Prophet (saw):

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ ۚ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللَّـهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ ۚ وَقَالُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا ۖ غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ

The Messenger has believed in what was revealed to him from his Lord, and [so have] the believers. All of them have believed in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers, [saying], "We make no distinction between any of His messengers." And they say, "We hear and we obey. [We seek] Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the [final] destination." [baqarah: 285]

There are many more examples...

[Rasul]

But says the opposite about the companions and followers of the last Prophet (saw):

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ ۚ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللَّـهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ ۚ وَقَالُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا ۖ غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ

The Messenger has believed in what was revealed to him from his Lord, and [so have] the believers. All of them have believed in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers, [saying], "We make no distinction between any of His messengers." And they say, "We hear and we obey. [We seek] Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the [final] destination." [baqarah: 285]

There are many more examples...

No mention of ''Sahaba'' in this verse, wondering... why? :lol:

Edited May 2, 2013 by Rasul

[Vigilare]

All the evidence is against what you say. They destroyed the sunnah and innovated new things while the Qur'an had perfected the deen during the life of the holy Prophet (pbuh). They are arch enemies of Allah, Muhammad (pbuh), Islam and all things lawful, moral and good. Your own books are full of evidences of their countless crimes. So on what basis, other than the usual Sunni rhapsody, do you lie?

I'd be interested in knowing what 'your own books' means to Ugly Jinn?

And the question remains answered, how did the sahaba reject Islam, Allah, and His Prophet?

Comparing the Prophet's (pbuh) companions to those of Musa (as) is, on the surface, valid. In principle it does mean that just being a companion of a prophet will not save you, but it doesn't, however, hold up well when you look a bit deeper into it.

But anyway, this discussion is flawed because it seems taking the extreme position is more sensible than anything else.

The sahaba were human, and capable of good and bad. And just like us they could make mistakes and therefore err. Some sunnis take an extreme position I feel and make them almost into some type of Muslim X-Men who were perfect and couldn't possibly do anything wrong. Clearly this position is wrong, as whatever tempts us tempted them. They were capable of falling from grace just like anyone else. However, the shias go one step further at the other end of the scale and completely demonize them to such an extent that you imagine that out of thousands of Muslims, in actual fact only a handful were actually true believers.

This doesn't actually make sense, nor does it make sense that Imam Ali would sit by and allow Islam to be distorted in the way it supposedly has.

I take the view that not all the sahaba were just or pious automatically. However, I believe most of them were and I believe that many of them made sacrifices that we'll never be able to and nor could we assume we would be able to make.

Edited May 2, 2013 by Vigilare

[Zigzag]

and make them almost into some type of Muslim X-Men

LOL !

But would you include Ali in this category that he has been made perhaps the wolverine of the group ? :)

[Ali Musaaa :)]

Musa/Haroon example is flawed. The followers of Musa rejected God, religion, Musa all together, the followers of the Prophet did not reject Allah, Islam, nor Muhammed.

No they didnt. They were waiting for Musa (as) to come back:

Aaron had told them before, “My people, you are deceived by the calf. Your Lord is the Beneficent. Follow me and obey my orders.” (20:90) They said, “We shall continue worshipping the calf until Moses comes back.” (20:91)

Clearly they recognised Musa's authority but rejected Haroon's (as).

In the same way it was Imām Ali's (as) authority that was rejected by the followers of Muhammad (sawa) even though they still recognised the Prophet's authority. The comparison is valid. In addition, it is also supported by Hadith al-Manzila.

[Vigilare]

LOL !

But would you include Ali in this category that he has been made perhaps the wolverine of the group ? :)

Imam Ali's status has been exagerrated greatly.

No they didnt. They were waiting for Musa (as) to come back:

Aaron had told them before, “My people, you are deceived by the calf. Your Lord is the Beneficent. Follow me and obey my orders.” (20:90) They said, “We shall continue worshipping the calf until Moses comes back.” (20:91)

Clearly they recognised Musa's authority but rejected Haroon's (as).

In the same way it was Imām Ali's (as) authority that was rejected by the followers of Muhammad (sawa) even though they still recognised the Prophet's authority. The comparison is valid. In addition, it is also supported by Hadith al-Manzila.

I think this is a seperate topic in itself - Companions of Musa (as) and Companions of Muhammad (as).

[Ali Musaaa :)]

Imam Ali's status has been exagerrated greatly.

So has Abu Bakr, who might I add is a ghost in Bukhari.

I think this is a seperate topic in itself - Companions of Musa (as) and Companions of Muhammad (as).

How do you suggest we deal with this topic then?

[Zigzag]

So has Abu Bakr, who might I add is a ghost in Bukhari.

What does this mean?

[Vigilare]

So has Abu Bakr, who might I add is a ghost in Bukhari.

Indeed, it's not beyond reason to assume sunnis would exaggerate about Abu Bakr or Umar and Shias would exaggerate about Imam Ali but it's worth noting that sunnis still do reject narrations in praise of them if found to be weak while you'd be hard pressed to find shias rejecting any narration in praise of Imam Ali even if it was blatantly an extreme view. Refer to my "criticism of..." thread.

But I'm not defending one over the other here, just pointing something out about shia's view of Imam Ali, so what sunnis think of Abu Bakr is irrelevant to me here.

Ghost?

How do you suggest we deal with this topic then?

Start a new thread titled "Companions of Musa (as) and Companions of Muhammad (pbuh)"? lol

Edit. Think I misunderstood !

Edited May 3, 2013 by Vigilare

[Ali Musaaa :)]

Ghost?

Ghosts don't appear too often do they? Hint, hint.

Start a new thread titled "Companions of Musa (as) and Companions of Muhammad (pbuh)"? lol

After you, Sir. :P

[Zigzag]

Ghosts don't appear too often do they? Hint, hint.

So are you criticizing that

- not much is narrated from him in Bukhari or

- not much is mentioned about him in Bukhari ?

[Vigilare]

OK inshallah I'll start a thread