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

What Do Shias Really Think About Abu Bakr (Ra)?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Ok if you just need proofs. I will get back with each and every proof you need. But when i provide proofs i dont wanna hear we dont trust this books and dont trust that books.

However i wasnt mixing any two events. Those two events are mixed by your people and using those events for a false claims.

And also regarding insulting and accusing a community please go out door buddy you will surely know the truth what i'm talking about.

Also if you have ao vast knowledge would you kindly let me know why shia people go to maidane karbala instead of Arafat during Hajj? Because it wasnt something what Prophet SWAS did nor asked to be a part of Hajj. Also same question regading Hijra. Prophet SWAS asked every muslim to do hijra from Makkah to Madina. However that dosent seem to be case with Shia.

Well i dont ask you any proofs for anything because i thot using some common sense would have helped atleast other people. However if you so insist only for proofs InshaAllah i will get back with them soon.

Salawalekum.

Posted on November 19th and to date of this post, no proofs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 406
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's called respect, something you don't seem to know much about. Do you have a problem with people saying Sayyida `Aisha?

I don't know what other Shias think of Abu Bakr but I personally think it would be better if he had died when he was a baby :) :) :) :) :) .... That way he still had a chance to go to Jannah. lolzzzz

(salam) Because after the death of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) there was a huge divide. It was between his family and his companions. Things got ugly and there were wars where people died. We have to p

Posted Images

  • Veteran Member

Can anybody of knowledge here on shiachat give me an information concerning the Original Post "what do shia think about Abu Bakar" the book written by scholar analysis or marja or leader statement (Imam Ayatollah Rahbar Khamenei as) ?

 

Is there a book that analyze the merit and wickedness of Abu Bakar as/la based on all of the hadis/riwayat by all previous scholar/ulama ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

Also if you have ao vast knowledge would you kindly let me know why shia people go to maidane karbala instead of Arafat during Hajj?

 

 

 

Because it wasnt something what Prophet SWAS did nor asked to be a part of Hajj. Also same question regading Hijra. Prophet SWAS asked every muslim to do hijra from Makkah to Madina. However that dosent seem to be case with Shia.

Well i dont ask you any proofs for anything because i thot using some common sense would have helped atleast other people. However if you so insist only for proofs InshaAllah i will get back with them soon.

Salawalekum.

 

Salam Alekum, 

 

First Shia do not go to Karbala as part of  Hajj. If they go during the Hajj time (first weeks of the month of Dhul Hijja), they do not consider this part of Hajj. 

The specifics of Hajj were fixed by our Holy Prophet before the events of Karbala. All the Imams of Ahl Al Bayt(a.s) went to Hajj, many times, as do all followers of Ahl Al Bayt(a.s) if they can afford to go. Also, I'm not sure what you mean about Arafa and Medina. If you go to these places, you will find many Shia there both for Hajj and Umrah. 

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

Salawalekum...

Yes it may be that what i read i wrong. Because Allah SWT knows best. But my brother just gv a thought, the book which was promised by Allah to be protected can it be altered ? Shia curse Sahabas which Prophet SWAS loved dearly and were among ones to accept Islam in early stage. It is also in same Quran not to speak bad about any Sahaba. Its not us who say bad or evil about anyone. We love Ali RA same aa we love Abubakr RA and we also love family of Prophet SWAS. Its you people who are dividing Islam for the historical reasons which never occured. You people are fighting which never took place and was only suppose to happen. If it would have not been Allah SWT will every thing you said would have been true. But history you read and know is different than your people imagination. You people want to change course of history which never took place and only imagined by few people who cover their faces by saying they love Ali RA and divide Islam.

if you really wish to understand History then be bias and read both books. InshaAllah you will get the truth and Allah SWT will guide you.

Ya habibi, theres lack of knowledge in you. You blame us for having 14 masoomeen and yet you have 100,000 masoomeen that if we question one person you say fitna fitna?? How can all the sahaba be all the same? What are they robots??

The old Muwatta, Malik, vol 1 p 307 and Maghazi, al Qawidi, p 310 reported the Holy Prophet said to the martyrs of Uhud, "Those, I bear witness against." Abu Bakr then said, "O Messenger of Allah, are we not their brothers? Did we not become Muslims as they did? Did we not fight as they did?" The Messenger replied, "Yes, but I do not know what you are going to do after me." On hearing that, Abu Bakr cried bitterly and said, "We are going to alter many things after your departure." And everyone knows what Abu Bakr and Umar did after the death of RasoolAllah and burned the house of the Purest one!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I don't know what other Shias think of Abu Bakr but I personally think it would be better if he had died when he was a baby :) :) :) :) :) ....

That way he still had a chance to go to Jannah. lolzzzzzzzzz

It's not a laughing and joking matter, but yes, I do think it may have been better [for Abu Bakr] had he died in his childhood. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I think at this time Islam needs unity. The real enemies of Islam (including Israel) are trying to destroy this unity by creating something like ISIS. So it's our duty to protect from this unity by respecting to other Muslims beliefs. Sunnis are all our brothers.

Shias should be our brothers and non-Shias, our equals in humanity. Still, we should speak out against ALL injustices, whether or not coming even from a Shia. We should ALL -- Muslims and non-Muslims -- unite against ALL forms of injustices. We should have non-Muslims speak out against the tyrannical first, second, and third Caliphs. We should have Shias speaking out against Shia oppressors, etc. 

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

Shia believe that Abubak and Omar and Uthman usurped the right of Ali (s.a) that was given to him in the day of Ghadir Khum. If you say that Abubakr dedicated whole of his life to Islam, what do u think about Imam Ali (a.s) who was the first one believed in Islam. Also He slept in the bed of Holy Prophet (saw) in dangerous situation and so on.

He hurt the Lady Fatimah Zahra (saw) and angered her so they angered Fatimah Zahra (saw).

nobody allowed to insult to Abubakr but we allowed to ask and think why they did such actions to the family of Holy Prophet (saw). According to Shia scholars it is Haram to curse and insult, but we can't deny the reality of history of Islam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salawalekum...

Yes it may be that what i read i wrong. Because Allah SWT knows best. But my brother just gv a thought, the book which was promised by Allah to be protected can it be altered ? Shia curse Sahabas which Prophet SWAS loved dearly and were among ones to accept Islam in early stage. It is also in same Quran not to speak bad about any Sahaba. Its not us who say bad or evil about anyone. We love Ali RA same aa we love Abubakr RA and we also love family of Prophet SWAS. Its you people who are dividing Islam for the historical reasons which never occured. You people are fighting which never took place and was only suppose to happen. If it would have not been Allah SWT will every thing you said would have been true. But history you read and know is different than your people imagination. You people want to change course of history which never took place and only imagined by few people who cover their faces by saying they love Ali RA and divide Islam.

if you really wish to understand History then be bias and read both books. InshaAllah you will get the truth and Allah SWT will guide you.

So your saying we cant study our history because its 'Fitna'?? MashaAllah , a person reflects on his history and bro its not us who changed the history its your 'Muawiya RA' lanah on him! I request you to keep your books safe cuz sooner or later you'll find changed hadiths in those same books. Dont just cherry pick something and tell me tht. Your not allowed to reflect and think. Every Friday prayer your Imam lies to you saying RasoolAllah left behind the Quran and his sunnah. Where? Where??? Your most authentic book Sahih Muslim says RasoolAllah said I leave behind you Quran and Ahlulbayt, so why lie?????? Why? Ahlulbayt(AS) is a poison for you or what? Why fabricate hadiths? Why? What is Umar gonna get you on the day of Judgement? How can you say Fatima RA and Abu Bakr RA? How? Tell. The killer and the killed both Radhi Allah Anha????????? Your Molanas dont allow you to think and there is enough light for the one who wants to see. The truth is infront of you. Either you believe it or not. But this, what Im saying to you, is a hujjah for you for the day of Judgement. Dont say,"i didnt know" did the Prophet leave behind for me the Quran and the companions? No. Clearly in Sahih Muslim is stated Quran and Ahlulbayt. So why say RADHI Allah ANHA to the killers of the Ahlulbayt? Why is Zakir Naik(May Allah's LANAH be on him) saying 'Yazid RA'??????? the one who sends an army to fight the grandson of RasoolAllah(SAW) is RA? Wallah go THINK and the truth is infront of you.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

There are so many topics here which each one can be a certain thread to discuss, Please refer the questions to separate threads,

 

 

Going back to Topic:

We believe being Prophet's Brother or Son or Wife or Father in Law will not convert Badness to Goodness.

 

Abobakr cheated on Rassoolollah (pbuh) and Humanity by involving himself to Caliphate.

Leading the people is something from God.

God selected the Leader and Rasoolollah (pbuh) announced this on Ghadeer day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Abu Bakr (ra) was the most closest friend and father in law of Prophet Muhaamad (s). Why do some Shias say bad words against him? What are the reasons behind disliking him?

Being a close friend and father in law does not make you a saint and neither gives you the seal of approval. Even the Ahle Sunnah believe that no one was Masoom apart from the Angels and Messengers. There is a lot in the Ahle Sunnah authentic books but this is what I will say that, the man made his mistakes and errors. He also had his regrets and he certainly wasn't the most knowledgeable and informative after the Messenger (pbuh).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
  • Basic Members

As selam aleykoum.OH Allah! How ignorant of us really to not read Quran.regarding hazrat abu bakr.quran 9:40.it says " when the unbelievers drove him(Prophet) he had no more than one companion and he said to him " have no fear for Allah is with is".1.it states that rasul Allah(SAW) had a single companion in cave of sour.if abu bakr was a hypocrite than companion word would have not been used bcz Allah does not make a mistake.2-why was Abu bakr feared,it's obvious he loved Rasul Allah SAWW and wanted Islam to reach madinah and did not want anyone catching or bruttaly killing them.3.Prophet SAW says to him "have no fear for Allah is with us".anyone who is pass 5 grade knows us means both then would Allah use this,no.so actually if ppl concentrate and ponder over Quran they can know truth.but dont count me as those who decieve and defend muawiah or yazeed.Imam Hussain R.A was surely a shadow of the Prophet SAW.so yes ppl martyring him won't go to jannah.salam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

Who said that? Let me guess. A companion?

No youre right a companion did NOT say that Allah above the seven heavens said 48_18.png

Sahih International

Certainly was Allah pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you, [O Muhammad], under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquillity upon them and rewarded them with an imminent conquest

 

Allah reffered to the treaty if hudaybiyiyah where all sahaba came and gave  their allegance.  So how can u curse them while Allah the the Creator and the one who knows as he said " He knew what was in their hearts" .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

Yes Abu Bakr was promised the Jannah... Really.. Which Jannah, the same one, which Prophet (pbuh) said many times that Hasan and Hussain (as) are it's leader and Fatima Zahra (as) is the owner of it.

So you think this Abu Bakr of yours who hated and tortured Fatima, Hasan and Hussain (as) will go to the same Jannah.

And don't get me even started on the daughter of Abu Bakr namely Ayesha whose hatred for Fatima (as) and Hasan and Hussain (Salam on both of these Aimah) was well known during all her wretched life.

Tell you what, I pray and you pray that may Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì end you up where Abu Bakr will go, and end me up where Fatima (as) and Hasnian (as) are. InshAAllah and Ameen. :)

You are cursing sahaba. We sunnis dont curse any sahaba wether ali and or fatima hassan or hussein nobody. All this stuff about torturing Fatima etc is from your books nothing is from the quran. Allah says  48_18.png

Sahih International

Certainly was Allah pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you, [O Muhammad], under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquillity upon them and rewarded them with an imminent conquest

 

How can u curse any sahaba while alllah says he was pleased with them. And dont think we curse ali or hasan or fatima etc, we dont we dont curse any sahaba. The prophet said Do not curse my Companions! Do not curse my Companions! I swear by Him in Whose hand my life is that, even if one among you had as much gold as Mount Uhud and spent it in the way of God, this would not be equal in reward to a few handfuls of them or even to half of that.

Allah also says And the first forerunners [in the faith] among the Muhajireen and the Ansar and those who followed them with good conduct - Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever. That is the great attainment. 

9:100 

How can u go against the Quran even if u dont agree with bukhari.

 

And u consider yourself muslim how can u make dua that this a guy go to hell.

 

May Allah guide us and alll muslims

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

Yes Abu Bakr was promised the Jannah... Really.. Which Jannah, the same one, which Prophet (pbuh) said many times that Hasan and Hussain (as) are it's leader and Fatima Zahra (as) is the owner of it.

So you think this Abu Bakr of yours who hated and tortured Fatima, Hasan and Hussain (as) will go to the same Jannah.

And don't get me even started on the daughter of Abu Bakr namely Ayesha whose hatred for Fatima (as) and Hasan and Hussain (Salam on both of these Aimah) was well known during all her wretched life.

Tell you what, I pray and you pray that may Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì end you up where Abu Bakr will go, and end me up where Fatima (as) and Hasnian (as) are. InshAAllah and Ameen. :)

Ameen we will both see that where Syeduna Abu Bakr Saddique (ra)will take us and you will regret at that time because both of them The Sahaba and the Ahlul Bait were at the right place and both were on Haqq

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

Do you All shias dont know that after All the prophets of Allah Syeduna Abu Bakr (ra) has the greatest darjah then Syeduna Umar e Farooq (ra)then Syeduna Usman e Ghanni (ra)and then Moula Ali (ra) has the greatest darjah. So there darjah is greater then Moula Ali (ra)So as you respect Moula Ali (ra)you should give more respect to the earlier caliphs

 

Moula Ali (ra)qouted:-

Whoever thinks that I am greater than Abu Bakr (ra)and Umar (ra)I will punish him Muftari (80 lashes)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

Abu bakr was the closest friend to The Prophet(SAW) yeah not. Oh he was in the cave. Oh yeah? who put themselves in the prophet's(SAW) in danger in the Prophet's bed to ensure our holy Prophet(SAW) was safe? Then While the Prophet(SAW) is sick, Abu Bakr and Omar are having a meeting of who will be the leader. Sounds like Abu is truly his own friend. Convienantly, The other 2 righteously guided Caliphates arent even there as counsel. Then Omar is calling the Holy Prophet(SAW) delirious when he asked for a pen to write something that will keep us all from going astray. When the Prophet had clearly sent those 3 to go with Ushama the general in Syria.Then you have back bitting Aisha and Hafsa their daughters in which Allah(SWT) approved a divorce in the ayats of Holy Quran for their great level of jealousy and evny behavior towards our beloved Prophet(SAW). it's just a coincedence it's their 2 daugthers. Then every Hadith that is narrated by aisha about aisha thats considered the Sunnah, that 45% of the Muslim world follows. Then the other 40% follows abu Haraiah who spent a total of 3 years with the Prophet(SAW) and conviencently has more hadiths narrated then there are trees on the planet to print them all. HAlf of them contridicting Aisha hadiths. Meanwhile you have Imam Ali(AS) who was born in the Kabaa and Fatimah(AS) Who were both raised As muslims by the Prophet(SAW) himself and nobody else. Then somehow abu bakr get Fatimah(AS) so angry to the point she doesn't talk time him till she dies. Proof you might ask. I ask anyone where is Fatimah(AS) grave then? If she didn't want them to be there even at her burial. Then 25 years late Aisha who hates Imam Ali because the Prophet(SAW) spend more time with him goes to war with your so called righteous guided caliphate and gets thousands of her so called children in Islam slaughtered because you she is the mother of the believers. And have the audacity to compare these people to the Blessed Ahla-Bayt(AS).then lets not forget about selfish Uthman and his Tribe completely wipes the Prophet's(SAW) grandsons Imam Hasan(AS) and Husayn(AS)from the earth a few years later. Yeah so all those hadiths about Clown Abu bakr Clown Omar and Clown Uthman and Clown Aisha are pure fabrications. Sorry we don't want them as our role models. So we can pray 4 different ways and non muslims think. One would have thought the Prophet(SAW) would have taught his Ummah one way of praying to their Lord(SWT) or one way of making Wudhu. But instead you have 4plus ways and 4plus stories or hadiths that's are supposedly Sahih. Then on top of all that everyone is promised paradise on top of that yayy! Sounds like a video game Astagafirulah. YEAHHHH Wrongggg! Islam is clear k thnx!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Perhaps an old discussion was merged here and in spite of me leaving the discussion, it seems like there was a little more said after me.  So I would like to see what Yam_110 has to say regarding this:

 

Al-Kafi, H 601, Ch. 33, h 4
 
Ahmad ibn Idris has narrated from Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Jabbar from Safwan ibn Yahya from Shu‘ayb al-Haddad from Durays al-Kunasi who has said the following, "I was in the presence of Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) and Abu Basir also was there.  The Imams (a.s.) said, 'David inherited the knowledge of the prophets.  Solomon inherited David.  Prophet Muhammad (s.a.) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (s.a.).  With us are the pages of Abraham and the tablets of Moses.'  Abu Basir then said, 'This is the knowledge.'  The Imams (a.s.) said, 'O Abu Muhammad, this is not the knowledge.  The knowledge is what happens in the nights and in the days, day after day and hour after hour.' "
 
[some of our companions, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa, from ibn Mahboub, from Hisham bin Salim, from Yazid al-Kanasi, he said: I asked abu `Abdillah (as) … Zakariyyah was Allah’s proof on the people, two years after `Isa’s silence, then he died so his son Yahya inherited his book and his wisdom while still young, have you not heard Allah’s words {O Yahya hold on to the book firmly, and we have granted him the judgement while still young}…]
 
Source: al-Kafi by al-Kulayni, volume 1 page 382. al-Majlisi declared its authenticity in Mir’aat-ul-`Uqool 4/246.
 
Yam_110, how many times did you repeat that Zakariyyah [as] was concerned about his wealth and that he was blessed with Yahya [as] so that his wealth was not lost?  Do you stand corrected or stiff-necked?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Veteran Member

 

Perhaps an old discussion was merged here and in spite of me leaving the discussion, it seems like there was a little more said after me.  So I would like to see what Yam_110 has to say regarding this:

 

Al-Kafi, H 601, Ch. 33, h 4
 
Ahmad ibn Idris has narrated from Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Jabbar from Safwan ibn Yahya from Shu‘ayb al-Haddad from Durays al-Kunasi who has said the following, "I was in the presence of Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) and Abu Basir also was there.  The Imams (a.s.) said, 'David inherited the knowledge of the prophets.  Solomon inherited David.  Prophet Muhammad (s.a.) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (s.a.).  With us are the pages of Abraham and the tablets of Moses.'  Abu Basir then said, 'This is the knowledge.'  The Imams (a.s.) said, 'O Abu Muhammad, this is not the knowledge.  The knowledge is what happens in the nights and in the days, day after day and hour after hour.' "
 
[some of our companions, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa, from ibn Mahboub, from Hisham bin Salim, from Yazid al-Kanasi, he said: I asked abu `Abdillah (as) … Zakariyyah was Allah’s proof on the people, two years after `Isa’s silence, then he died so his son Yahya inherited his book and his wisdom while still young, have you not heard Allah’s words {O Yahya hold on to the book firmly, and we have granted him the judgement while still young}…]
 
Source: al-Kafi by al-Kulayni, volume 1 page 382. al-Majlisi declared its authenticity in Mir’aat-ul-`Uqool 4/246.
 
Yam_110, how many times did you repeat that Zakariyyah [as] was concerned about his wealth and that he was blessed with Yahya [as] so that his wealth was not lost?  Do you stand corrected or stiff-necked?

 

 

(salam)

 

Apologies for the late reply, I have been away for some time.

 

Interesting to see you leave the conversation when you had no answers and now come back with narrations posted on another forum. Copy pasting it and thinking that you have the answer is even more ridiculous.

 

Firstly, if the above narrations are true then it only complicates things for you because Imam Ali (as) with all the knowledge he inherited from Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) who inherited from the prophets earlier (as per the above narrations) believed that Fadak was rightfully Bibi Fatima's (s). What does that imply?? It only suggests that Fadak belonged to Bibi Fatima (s) based on the divine knowledge been passed on through the prophets.

 

 

Secondly, if we look at it logically, even then your stance makes no sense. If you tell me that you inherited knowledge from your forefathers, would that mean that you have no rights to inherit anything else from your father? Just asking.

 

 

So as we can see the narrations you have copy pasted from another forum are doing you no good. It is better you accept the truth and stop chasing your tail as it is only embarrassing you further. Do you now stand corrected or want to continue with more desperate attempts?

 

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

(salam)

 

1.  Apologies for the late reply, I have been away for some time.

 

2.  Interesting to see you leave the conversation when you had no answers and now come back with narrations posted on another forum. Copy pasting it and thinking that you have the answer is even more ridiculous.

 

3.  Firstly, if the above narrations are true then it only complicates things for you because Imam Ali (as) with all the knowledge he inherited from Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) who inherited from the prophets earlier (as per the above narrations) believed that Fadak was rightfully Bibi Fatima's (s). What does that imply?? It only suggests that Fadak belonged to Bibi Fatima (s) based on the divine knowledge been passed on through the prophets.

 

 

4.  Secondly, if we look at it logically, even then your stance makes no sense. If you tell me that you inherited knowledge from your forefathers, would that mean that you have no rights to inherit anything else from your father? Just asking.

 

 

5.  So as we can see the narrations you have copy pasted from another forum are doing you no good. It is better you accept the truth and stop chasing your tail as it is only embarrassing you further. Do you now stand corrected or want to continue with more desperate attempts?

 

 

(wasalam)

 

 

Walaykum as salaam,

 

1.  Do not apologize for your late reply.  If anything, apologize for bringing me up when I was not involved in your shenanigans.

 

2.  No answers you say!  I mean seriously, how many questions did you have that I did not answer?  Was it five?  Or would you say it was twelve since twelve is your magical number?  Should I assume that five were apparent and the remaining seven questions were in occultation?

 

3.  First of all, please learn whether the narrations from your sources are true or not before copy-pasting ours.  If I am not mistaken, you even had a narration from Tabaqat ibn Sa'ad regarding some shirt that was passed down from Ibrahim [as] to Yusuf [as].  That, according to your desperation, was inheritance.  But what do the narrations (I quoted) say?  Furthermore, let us find out my intention behind quoting them.

 

I quoted them to show you, more so to show others with eyes, that Yahya [as] inherited Zakariya [as] not in the material sense.

 

So you took this as an opportunity to introduce Imam Ali [ra] to the mix and the claim that he supported Bibi Fatima [ra] when it came to Fadak.  He did not even reclaim Fadak when he had a chance so how can you say he stood by Fatima [ra]?  In fact, there is a narration which speaks of Fatima's [ra] anger towards Imam Ali [ra] since he did not help him in this matter (regarding Fadak).  Sure, Ahlul Bayt [ra] were not in the habit of reclaiming what was taken from them unjustly.  I wonder why then their minions, like yourself, still cry over it when they refused to take it.  Also, it is pathetic to read that they did not take back that which was usurped from them but they would continuously talk about it.  I mean, did they want it or did they not?  Again, Ahlul Bayt [ra] are free from this nonsense but your wits have long betrayed you.

 

4.  Sorry to burst your bubble but my father is not a prophet.  The exception to the rule exists for Prophets [asws], if only you could read and contemplate before reacting and making a mockery of yourself.

 

5.  I stand corrected.  You left half stupid; you have returned full.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Walaykum as salaam,

 

1.  Do not apologize for your late reply.  If anything, apologize for bringing me up when I was not involved in your shenanigans.

 

2.  No answers you say!  I mean seriously, how many questions did you have that I did not answer?  Was it five?  Or would you say it was twelve since twelve is your magical number?  Should I assume that five were apparent and the remaining seven questions were in occultation?

 

3.  First of all, please learn whether the narrations from your sources are true or not before copy-pasting ours.  If I am not mistaken, you even had a narration from Tabaqat ibn Sa'ad regarding some shirt that was passed down from Ibrahim [as] to Yusuf [as].  That, according to your desperation, was inheritance.  But what do the narrations (I quoted) say?  Furthermore, let us find out my intention behind quoting them.

 

I quoted them to show you, more so to show others with eyes, that Yahya [as] inherited Zakariya [as] not in the material sense.

 

So you took this as an opportunity to introduce Imam Ali [ra] to the mix and the claim that he supported Bibi Fatima [ra] when it came to Fadak.  He did not even reclaim Fadak when he had a chance so how can you say he stood by Fatima [ra]?  In fact, there is a narration which speaks of Fatima's [ra] anger towards Imam Ali [ra] since he did not help him in this matter (regarding Fadak).  Sure, Ahlul Bayt [ra] were not in the habit of reclaiming what was taken from them unjustly.  I wonder why then their minions, like yourself, still cry over it when they refused to take it.  Also, it is pathetic to read that they did not take back that which was usurped from them but they would continuously talk about it.  I mean, did they want it or did they not?  Again, Ahlul Bayt [ra] are free from this nonsense but your wits have long betrayed you.

 

4.  Sorry to burst your bubble but my father is not a prophet.  The exception to the rule exists for Prophets [asws], if only you could read and contemplate before reacting and making a mockery of yourself.

 

5.  I stand corrected.  You left half stupid; you have returned full.

 

 

Since dishonesty is your prime trait, I am not surprised you ignored my reply on the narrations and chose to call names. 

 

Your desperate attempts at defending the crimes of your beloved ones has only left you boorish. 

 

Your old habit of cherry picking part of narrations or cherry picking narrations themselves has still not deserted you. You copy pasted a couple of narrations and when I presented the outcome based on the narrations, you tell me that you only wanted to highlight a part of the narration. Seriously?? Is that how it works for you? You then try taking me to your dreamland and dish out some concocted incidents. I sort of incorrectly assumed that you might have changed and would have started thinking logically but you have only got worse with your manners and your attitude.

 

You presented a couple of narrations to which I replied by giving you how shallow your answer was & how it only suggests that you are clutching at straws as the narrations only do more harm than good to your cause. And guess what? You as usual ignored the reply and started coming up with fairy tales of your own.

 

If you believe that Imams inherited the Prophetic knowledge then you must agree that Imam Ali (as) sided with Bibi Fatima (s) on Fadak. Your own Sahih books claim that he had asked for Fadak.

 

Why should I discriminate between your father and the Prophets when it comes to inheritance? The exception for prophets is not mentioned in Quran. So my reply still stands and your assumption that you can inherit your father but the children of the Prophets cannot is nothing but a lie as you have so far failed to prove from Quran. It is quite clearly written in Quran that every one inherits their parents. But you seem to know more than the Quran. So going by Quranic verses, it is your answers which are devoid of any logic and it is you who is making a mockery of himself. 

 

I know you are desperate to outwit logic but looking at a part of narration and ignoring the main content only makes you look like a fool. Your attempts at defending the crimes of the two is only making you look stupid or should I say that your blind love for your Demi-Gods has only made you a laughing stock. Better correct yourself at the earliest or you would face the wrath of Allah as promised for liars in Quran.

 

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  Since dishonesty is your prime trait, I am not surprised you ignored my reply on the narrations and chose to call names. 

 

2.  You copy pasted a couple of narrations and when I presented the outcome based on the narrations, you tell me that you only wanted to highlight a part of the narration. Seriously?? Is that how it works for you?

 

3.  but you have only got worse with your manners and your attitude.

 

4.  If you believe that Imams inherited the Prophetic knowledge then you must agree that Imam Ali (as) sided with Bibi Fatima (s) on Fadak. Your own Sahih books claim that he had asked for Fadak.

 

5.  The exception for prophets is not mentioned in Quran. So my reply still stands and your assumption that you can inherit your father but the children of the Prophets cannot is nothing but a lie as you have so far failed to prove from Quran. It is quite clearly written in Quran that every one inherits their parents.

 

6.  should I say that your blind love for your Demi-Gods has only made you a laughing stock. Better correct yourself at the earliest or you would face the wrath of Allah as promised for liars in Quran.

 

 

1.  Always a pleasure to give you a dose of your own medicine (as far as name-calling is concerned).

 

2.  Clearly, you cannot put one and one together so let me spell out my intention behind quoting those narrations.  If my memory serves me right, you were the one to have claimed that Zakariya [as] was concerned about his wealth being squandered by others, therefore, he asked Allah [swt] for a heir who could inherit him.  From what I can see, you stand opposed to your own sahih hadith.

 

"[some of our companions, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa, from ibn Mahboub, from Hisham bin Salim, from Yazid al-Kanasi, he said: I asked abu `Abdillah (as) … Zakariyyah was Allah’s proof on the people, two years after `Isa’s silence, then he died so his son Yahya inherited his book and his wisdom while still young, have you not heard Allah’s words {O Yahya hold on to the book firmly, and we have granted him the judgement while still young}…]"

 

And that is exactly why I highlighted the portion regarding Yahya [as]. 

 

Knowing your habit of lying, let me quote you your own words before you retract them:

"I am surprised that in order to defend someone so religiously you have started making illogical statements. Prophet Zakaria (as) says that he fears his relatives and he needs a successor. Please explain to me, how can his relatives inherit his knowledge? The only logical thing seems to be that he is asking for a successor to his wealth."

 

(post # 38)

 

3.  I am only a mirror :)

 

4.  I think the following sentence "If you believe that Imams inherited the Prophetic knowledge then you must agree that Imam Ali (as) sided with Bibi Fatima (s) on Fadak" broke the needle on the stupidity scale.  What does inheriting of knowledge have to do with Imam Ali [ra] siding with Fatima [ra]?  Inheriting knowledge is one thing, siding with Fatima [ra] is another.  And none of our sahih narrations state that Imam Ali [ra] sided with Fatima [ra].  In fact, as you conveniently overlooked it, there is a Shia narration which says that Fatima [ra] was angry with Imam Ali [ra] since he did not help her in reclaiming Fadak.

 

5.  But the Qur'an clearly forbids Fay from being owned by one or a few individuals.  Surah Al-Hashr verse 7!  Typical you; ignored the verse and kept pushing on in vain as you are doing now.  Your lie that Zakariya [as] asked for a heir so that his material wealth could be inherited has been refuted by all texts, including Shia hadiths.  Also, another example that you could not account for, was the kingdom going from Talut [as] to Dawood [as].  Sure you had a narration regarding the number of horses Sulaiman [as] "inherited" but if this transfer of kingdom was inheritance, how was Dawood [as] an "inheritor" of Talut [as] when they were not blood related?

 

So the exception is not clearly stated in the Qur'an but given the above-mentioned points and numerous narrations stating that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance, it becomes clear that Prophets [asws] do not leave material wealth for inheritance.  No wonder Imam Ali [ra] never overturned Abu Bakr's [ra] decision.

 

6.  May Allah [swt] protect Muslims from demi-gods and curse all from amongst us who subscribe to "demi gods", who - in the name of their demi-gods - have concocted du'as, rituals and made every other shirk known to mankind permissible and wajib upon Muslims.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  Always a pleasure to give you a dose of your own medicine (as far as name-calling is concerned).

 

2.  Clearly, you cannot put one and one together so let me spell out my intention behind quoting those narrations.  If my memory serves me right, you were the one to have claimed that Zakariya [as] was concerned about his wealth being squandered by others, therefore, he asked Allah [swt] for a heir who could inherit him.  From what I can see, you stand opposed to your own sahih hadith.

 

"[some of our companions, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa, from ibn Mahboub, from Hisham bin Salim, from Yazid al-Kanasi, he said: I asked abu `Abdillah (as) … Zakariyyah was Allah’s proof on the people, two years after `Isa’s silence, then he died so his son Yahya inherited his book and his wisdom while still young, have you not heard Allah’s words {O Yahya hold on to the book firmly, and we have granted him the judgement while still young}…]"

 

And that is exactly why I highlighted the portion regarding Yahya [as]. 

 

Knowing your habit of lying, let me quote you your own words before you retract them:

"I am surprised that in order to defend someone so religiously you have started making illogical statements. Prophet Zakaria (as) says that he fears his relatives and he needs a successor. Please explain to me, how can his relatives inherit his knowledge? The only logical thing seems to be that he is asking for a successor to his wealth."

 

(post # 38)

 

3.  I am only a mirror :)

 

4.  I think the following sentence "If you believe that Imams inherited the Prophetic knowledge then you must agree that Imam Ali (as) sided with Bibi Fatima (s) on Fadak" broke the needle on the stupidity scale.  What does inheriting of knowledge have to do with Imam Ali [ra] siding with Fatima [ra]?  Inheriting knowledge is one thing, siding with Fatima [ra] is another.  And none of our sahih narrations state that Imam Ali [ra] sided with Fatima [ra].  In fact, as you conveniently overlooked it, there is a Shia narration which says that Fatima [ra] was angry with Imam Ali [ra] since he did not help her in reclaiming Fadak.

 

5.  But the Qur'an clearly forbids Fay from being owned by one or a few individuals.  Surah Al-Hashr verse 7!  Typical you; ignored the verse and kept pushing on in vain as you are doing now.  Your lie that Zakariya [as] asked for a heir so that his material wealth could be inherited has been refuted by all texts, including Shia hadiths.  Also, another example that you could not account for, was the kingdom going from Talut [as] to Dawood [as].  Sure you had a narration regarding the number of horses Sulaiman [as] "inherited" but if this transfer of kingdom was inheritance, how was Dawood [as] an "inheritor" of Talut [as] when they were not blood related?

 

So the exception is not clearly stated in the Qur'an but given the above-mentioned points and numerous narrations stating that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance, it becomes clear that Prophets [asws] do not leave material wealth for inheritance.  No wonder Imam Ali [ra] never overturned Abu Bakr's [ra] decision.

 

6.  May Allah [swt] protect Muslims from demi-gods and curse all from amongst us who subscribe to "demi gods", who - in the name of their demi-gods - have concocted du'as, rituals and made every other shirk known to mankind permissible and wajib upon Muslims.

 

 

You are still incorrectly assuming things and fabricating more lies as you always have been. There is no way on earth you can present a narration and expect only a part of it to be accepted by completely ignoring the context of it. Learn to read the complete narration before talking about it. It would save you some embarrassment.

 

I know cherry picking stuff is how you like to cheat others which is why even Quranic verses hasn't been spared your deceitful translations but this practice of cherry picking part of narrations and incorrectly translating verses doesn't work here. We have seen enough of your kind here to know how desperate such people can get.

 

 

Regarding Fai, you have been corrected multiple times by many people about it and yet you are not letting go of the lie. Typical of you! Let me again remind you as to what your second caliph said about Fai.

 

Sahih Muslim, The Book of Jihad & Expedition, hadith no. 4347:
 
It has been narrated on the authority of Umar, who said: The properties abandoned by Banu Nadir were the ones which Allah bestowed upon His Apostle for which no expedition was undertaken either with cavalry or camelry. These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him). He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons as preparation for Jihad. 
 
 
Umar said ownership of fai was particularly meant for the Prophet (pbuh) while you say fai cannot be owned by one or few individuals. Now, can you answer this question please:
 
Whose word do I go with here on the ownership of Fai? Your's or Your caliph's?
Whose translation of Quran do I trust here? Your's or your caliph's?
 
 

 

Let's put your fairy tales to rest using Quran. Allah swt says in Quran that :

 

[Yusufali 4:11] Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.

 

 

If you can present a verse which excludes prophets from the above then you have made your point otherwise you have failed miserably in the defense of your demi-gods who usurped the land from their rightful owners. As we read in Quran:

 

[Yusufali 4:10] Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire!

 

 

 

To summarize, all you have to do is to let us all know if we should go by your interpretation of Quran or your caliph's and just present one verse which excludes the children of the prophets from the verses of inheritance in Quran.

 

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  I know cherry picking stuff is how you like to cheat others which is why even Quranic verses hasn't been spared your deceitful translations but this practice of cherry picking part of narrations and incorrectly translating verses doesn't work here. We have seen enough of your kind here to know how desperate such people can get.

 

2.  Regarding Fai, you have been corrected multiple times by many people about it

 

3.  Sahih Muslim, The Book of Jihad & Expedition, hadith no. 4347:
 
It has been narrated on the authority of Umar, who said: The properties abandoned by Banu Nadir were the ones which Allah bestowed upon His Apostle for which no expedition was undertaken either with cavalry or camelry. These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him). He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons as preparation for Jihad. 
 
 
Umar said ownership of fai was particularly meant for the Prophet (pbuh) while you say fai cannot be owned by one or few individuals.
 
4.  Let's put your fairy tales to rest using Quran. Allah swt says in Quran that :

 

[Yusufali 4:11] Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.

 

 

5.  If you can present a verse which excludes prophets from the above then you have made your point otherwise you have failed miserably in the defense of your demi-gods who usurped the land from their rightful owners. As we read in Quran:

 

 

 

6.  To summarize, all you have to do is to let us all know if we should go by your interpretation of Quran or your caliph's and just present one verse which excludes the children of the prophets from the verses of inheritance in Quran.

 

 

 

1.  Sure you have seen enough of my kind here because your kind won't last a day in a mainstream Muslim website.  That is, if you dare to step outside your comfort zone to defend your position.

 

2.  You are right about people confronting me over Fadak.  Recently, in another topic, someone quoted Nahj al-Balagha as a Sunni source.  Another user presented something by Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed - who authored Sharh Nahj al-Balagha - and tried to pass him off as a Sunni.  Not to mention the tens of hadiths that were borrowed from sources prone to fabrications and weak hadiths all of which have been refuted, Alhamdulilah.

 

3.  Didn't you say, "even Quranic verses hasn't been spared your deceitful translations but this practice of cherry picking part of narrations and incorrectly translating verses doesn't work here"?

 

Let me show you who mistranslates and misinterprets Qur'anic verses and narrations.

 

Umar [ra] said, "These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him)" and you misrepresent it by saying, "Umar said ownership of fai was particularly meant for the Prophet".

 

Where does the narration use the word "ownership", ya jaahil? 

 

In fact, the narration is in line with Surah Al-Hashr, verses 6 through 10 but verse 7 in particular:

 

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment."

 

While the dilemma remains as to whether Fadak was a gift or inheritance - and I am sure you do not have the gall to stick to one because that would block your entry down the rabbit hole or emergency exit - this narration shatters both claims.  If Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra], why was the Prophet [saw] distributing its proceeds?  You do not give land as gift to your daughter and then give away its proceeds to others.  If you do, then what is the purpose of the land and therefore, the gift?  Not to mention that the verse used in support of the gift claim, Surah 17 verse 26, was revealed in Mecca, not Madina.  And all the weak narrations say that after the verse was revealed, the Prophet [saw] called Fatima [ra] and gave her Fadak.  Well, since the Surah was revealed in Mecca, there was no Fadak at the time.  So how could the Prophet [saw] call Fatima [ra] and give her Fadak?

 

Also, it cannot be inheritance because the narration confirms verse 7 of Surah Al-Hashr because Fay is for the benefit of the ummah (even Muhajir, Ansar and Tabieen) and the Prophet [saw] used to distribute its proceeds and use the rest for preparation.  In fact, verse 7 prohibits the ownership of Fay by one or a few individuals.

 

4.  We all know that Shia and Sunni texts unanimously agree on the fact that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  But if I were to entertain your point, how could Fatima [ra] inherit Fadak when Prophet [saw] did not have ownership over it?  I am assuming you agree with the narration you have quoted and therefore, you can see that Fadak was used for the betterment of Muslims (as commanded by verse 7 of Surah Al-Hashr....same verse which prohibits one or few individuals having ownership rights over Fay).

 

5.  I like how you keep ignoring the transfer of kingdom from Talut [as] to Dawood [as] but speaking of demi-gods, from what I understand, you have to agree that God is Perfect.  Therefore, a demi-god has to be infallible.  I, and every Sunni, believes and admits that Abu Bakr [ra], Umar [ra] and Uthman [ra], along with the rest of the Companions, were fallibleCan you say the same regarding Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and their children, mainly the 11 remaining Imams [ra]?

 

If you can, then you have not taken them as demi-gods.  If you cannot, then you are accusing me of the shirk which you have already committed yourself.

 

6.  Do you have one verse for Imamat?  You do not!  But you take it as your usool-e-deen based on misinterpretting hadiths.  If you can accept Imamat without rigorous research, why cannot you accept your own authentic narrations regarding Prophets [asws] not leaving any inheritance?  In fact the narrations say that Prophets [asws] do not leave any "dinars and dirhams", in other words, not even money.....nothing of value!

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  Sure you have seen enough of my kind here because your kind won't last a day in a mainstream Muslim website.  That is, if you dare to step outside your comfort zone to defend your position.

 

2.  You are right about people confronting me over Fadak.  Recently, in another topic, someone quoted Nahj al-Balagha as a Sunni source.  Another user presented something by Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed - who authored Sharh Nahj al-Balagha - and tried to pass him off as a Sunni.  Not to mention the tens of hadiths that were borrowed from sources prone to fabrications and weak hadiths all of which have been refuted, Alhamdulilah.

 

3.  Didn't you say, "even Quranic verses hasn't been spared your deceitful translations but this practice of cherry picking part of narrations and incorrectly translating verses doesn't work here"?

 

Let me show you who mistranslates and misinterprets Qur'anic verses and narrations.

 

Umar [ra] said, "These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him)" and you misrepresent it by saying, "Umar said ownership of fai was particularly meant for the Prophet".

 

Where does the narration use the word "ownership", ya jaahil? 

 

In fact, the narration is in line with Surah Al-Hashr, verses 6 through 10 but verse 7 in particular:

 

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment."

 

While the dilemma remains as to whether Fadak was a gift or inheritance - and I am sure you do not have the gall to stick to one because that would block your entry down the rabbit hole or emergency exit - this narration shatters both claims.  If Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra], why was the Prophet [saw] distributing its proceeds?  You do not give land as gift to your daughter and then give away its proceeds to others.  If you do, then what is the purpose of the land and therefore, the gift?  Not to mention that the verse used in support of the gift claim, Surah 17 verse 26, was revealed in Mecca, not Madina.  And all the weak narrations say that after the verse was revealed, the Prophet [saw] called Fatima [ra] and gave her Fadak.  Well, since the Surah was revealed in Mecca, there was no Fadak at the time.  So how could the Prophet [saw] call Fatima [ra] and give her Fadak?

 

Also, it cannot be inheritance because the narration confirms verse 7 of Surah Al-Hashr because Fay is for the benefit of the ummah (even Muhajir, Ansar and Tabieen) and the Prophet [saw] used to distribute its proceeds and use the rest for preparation.  In fact, verse 7 prohibits the ownership of Fay by one or a few individuals.

 

4.  We all know that Shia and Sunni texts unanimously agree on the fact that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  But if I were to entertain your point, how could Fatima [ra] inherit Fadak when Prophet [saw] did not have ownership over it?  I am assuming you agree with the narration you have quoted and therefore, you can see that Fadak was used for the betterment of Muslims (as commanded by verse 7 of Surah Al-Hashr....same verse which prohibits one or few individuals having ownership rights over Fay).

 

5.  I like how you keep ignoring the transfer of kingdom from Talut [as] to Dawood [as] but speaking of demi-gods, from what I understand, you have to agree that God is Perfect.  Therefore, a demi-god has to be infallible.  I, and every Sunni, believes and admits that Abu Bakr [ra], Umar [ra] and Uthman [ra], along with the rest of the Companions, were fallibleCan you say the same regarding Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and their children, mainly the 11 remaining Imams [ra]?

 

If you can, then you have not taken them as demi-gods.  If you cannot, then you are accusing me of the shirk which you have already committed yourself.

 

6.  Do you have one verse for Imamat?  You do not!  But you take it as your usool-e-deen based on misinterpretting hadiths.  If you can accept Imamat without rigorous research, why cannot you accept your own authentic narrations regarding Prophets [asws] not leaving any inheritance?  In fact the narrations say that Prophets [asws] do not leave any "dinars and dirhams", in other words, not even money.....nothing of value!

 

Ignorance is bliss. Suites you perfectly. Umar says that Fai was meant particularly for the Prophet (pbuh) while you say it wasn't. Then you play around with words and call me jaahil when anyone reading this thread can see it is you who is abu jahl here. Read the verse and the narration again, Umar did not say it was meant for the people but on the contrary he said it was meant for the Prophet (pbuh). If he was merely a circuit as you suggest then why did Umar use the words PARTICULARLY MEANT FOR THE PROPHET (pbuh)??? The difference is obvious to any truth seeker.

 

So do you agree with your caliph's interpretation of Fai that it was meant particularly for the Prophet (pbuh)?

 

 

One more dishonest assumption of yours. Shias do not believe that prophets do not leave inheritance. If we did then we won't be having this discussion. You take a Shia narration, quote it out of context and assume that your fairy tales are true. You deceitful liar.

 

 

Quran says every one has a right to inheritance but you on the other hand state the contrary. So my position is simple, bring a verse which nullifies the above position for the children of Prophets. 

 

I take it that you do not have any verse to support your stance which is why you are again desperately trying to deviate this topic. So either your present a verse or accept that you have been miserable in your defense of the crimes committed by your demi gods. 

 

 

And remember what I posted in my previous post about those who unjustly usurp the property: 

 

As we read in Quran:

[Yusufali 4:10Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire!

 

 

We have all seen how good you are at mud slinging. So lets cut your BS and answer to the point. Can you?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

1.  Umar says that Fai was meant particularly for the Prophet (pbuh) while you say it wasn't.

 

2.  Then you play around with words and call me jaahil when anyone reading this thread can see it is you who is abu jahl here.

 

3.  Read the verse and the narration again, Umar did not say it was meant for the people but on the contrary he said it was meant for the Prophet (pbuh).

 

4.  So do you agree with your caliph's interpretation of Fai that it was meant particularly for the Prophet (pbuh)?

 

5.  I take it that you do not have any verse to support your stance

 

6.  And remember what I posted in my previous post about those who unjustly usurp the property: 

 

7.  We have all seen how good you are at mud slinging. So lets cut your BS and answer to the point. Can you?

 

 

 

1.  Umar [ra] said that and he said more than just that which I will get to in a minute.  In the meantime, I am glad that you dropped the word "ownership" and quoted him correctly this time around.  See we are making progress.  You are a dimwit but the world has not ended yet.

 

2.  Seriously, anyone with basic reading skills can see how you inserted the word "ownership" and then took it out when I caught you.  I would have asked you to have some shame but seeing your learning challenges, I would rather expose you.

 

3.  Fadak was meant for the Prophet [saw] so Umar [ra] spoke the truth.  And this confirms the Qur'an 59:7!

 

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you.  So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment."

 

The narration says, "These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him).  He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons as preparation for Jihad."

 

So the narration affirms the verse by saying that these properties were meant for the Prophet [saw] becase he [saw] would distribute from it.  In other words, the Prophet [saw] was in charge of who gets what.  When the Prophet [saw] left the body, the burden of responsibility fell upon the shoulders of Abu Bakr [ra].

 

Now you know why Umar [ra] said that "these properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him).

 

4.  Absolutely!  Do you agree with the Qur'an stating that Fay cannot have one or few individual owners?

 

5.  I take that you do not have the gall to answer my question regarding the so-called demi-gods.  Can Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and the 11 remaining Imams [ra] make mistakes?  As far as we are concerned, none of the Sahabas [ra] were infallible.

 

Waiting for you to man up this one time.

 

6.  Listen to the Prophet [saw] who said, "Do not curse my Companions.  Whoever curses them, the curse of Allah and the angels and all people is on him.  Allah will not accept any recompense or counterweight from him."

 

7.  Yeah, can you answer whether or not Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and the 11 remaining Imams [ra] make mistakes? 

 

Trust me, I will run you into the ground with your demi-gods accusation.  If only we get you to put on your big boy pants for once!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  Umar [ra] said that and he said more than just that which I will get to in a minute.  In the meantime, I am glad that you dropped the word "ownership" and quoted him correctly this time around.  See we are making progress.  You are a dimwit but the world has not ended yet.

 

2.  Seriously, anyone with basic reading skills can see how you inserted the word "ownership" and then took it out when I caught you.  I would have asked you to have some shame but seeing your learning challenges, I would rather expose you.

 

3.  Fadak was meant for the Prophet [saw] so Umar [ra] spoke the truth.  And this confirms the Qur'an 59:7!

 

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you.  So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment."

 

The narration says, "These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him).  He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons as preparation for Jihad."

 

So the narration affirms the verse by saying that these properties were meant for the Prophet [saw] becase he [saw] would distribute from it.  In other words, the Prophet [saw] was in charge of who gets what.  When the Prophet [saw] left the body, the burden of responsibility fell upon the shoulders of Abu Bakr [ra].

 

Now you know why Umar [ra] said that "these properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him).

 

4.  Absolutely!  Do you agree with the Qur'an stating that Fay cannot have one or few individual owners?

 

5.  I take that you do not have the gall to answer my question regarding the so-called demi-gods.  Can Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and the 11 remaining Imams [ra] make mistakes?  As far as we are concerned, none of the Sahabas [ra] were infallible.

 

Waiting for you to man up this one time.

 

6.  Listen to the Prophet [saw] who said, "Do not curse my Companions.  Whoever curses them, the curse of Allah and the angels and all people is on him.  Allah will not accept any recompense or counterweight from him."

 

7.  Yeah, can you answer whether or not Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and the 11 remaining Imams [ra] make mistakes? 

 

Trust me, I will run you into the ground with your demi-gods accusation.  If only we get you to put on your big boy pants for once!

 

.

Loads of BS again but not a single verse produced to answer the question. No response so far from you suggesting that there is or there isn't a verse to the question asked. Instead we see you going around in circles chasing your tail and wasting everyone's time. Typical you! A desperate liar who is only here for mud slinging and spreading lies.

 

Since you are finding it difficult to comprehend simple words of the English language, let me break it down so that even a kindergarten student can understand. Here it goes, if your father says that a candy is particularly meant for you, what does it mean? You own the rights to it, doesn't it? It is up to you to do what you want with it, eat it or share it or throw it. You own the rights to it. So as you can see for yourself how senseless your arguments sound. This is just one of the many dimwitted arguments you have presented so far. Say it to yourself, 'I am a dimwit' & don't worry the world won't end there.

 

I don't know why I was hoping to see some sensible talk from you when you backtracked on your earlier misinterpretation of the Quranic verse about fai but seeing how you tried concluding here, it looks like you have merely jumped from one imaginary bubble of your's to another. You have still not let go of your deceitful nature. 

 

Read the narration again along with the correct translation of the Quranic verse and you will see how gross your misinterpretation of fai sounds.

 

 

Just because you think of us taking Imam Ali (as) and Bibi Fatima (s) as demi-Gods doesn't mean that we do. So it would be better if you could stick to the topic at hand and stop your dubious ways of diverting the topic. Man up for once and accept the truth that you are fighting a lost battle as Quran does not support your fictitious statements.

 

Who is insulting the companions of the Prophet (pbuh)? May my life be sacrificed for the righteous companions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). I was merely showing you the true colours of certain individuals using Quran. If you do not like what the Quran says then I cannot help you much. In-fact, I doubt if any true Muslim can help you. So stop playing the sympathy card and better get to the point. 

 

Do you have a Quranic verse excluding the children of prophets or not? 

 

 

If you intended to not answer the questions asked then why did you ask for me on this thread long after our conversation had ended? I haven't seen an answer to the above question for a long time. Stop running away from it and answer the question asked. Do you or do you not have a verse from Quran to exclude the kin of the prophets?

 

 

Until you present a Quranic verse which excludes the kin of the prophets from inheritance, the below verse will be the fate of the people whose crimes you are defending here  [Yusufali 4:10Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire! . Neither you nor anyone can accuse me of insulting anyone as I am merely presenting two verses from Quran.

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

.

1.  Loads of BS again but not a single verse produced to answer the question.

 

2.  Here it goes, if your father says that a candy is particularly meant for you, what does it mean? You own the rights to it, doesn't it? It is up to you to do what you want with it, eat it or share it or throw it. You own the rights to it.

 

3.  I don't know why I was hoping to see some sensible talk from you when you backtracked on your earlier misinterpretation of the Quranic verse about fai but seeing how you tried concluding here, it looks like you have merely jumped from one imaginary bubble of your's to another.

 

4.  Read the narration again along with the correct translation of the Quranic verse and you will see how gross your misinterpretation of fai sounds.

 

5.  Just because you think of us taking Imam Ali (as) and Bibi Fatima (s) as demi-Gods doesn't mean that we do.  So it would be better if you could stick to the topic at hand and stop your dubious ways of diverting the topic.

 

6.  I was merely showing you the true colours of certain individuals using Quran. If you do not like what the Quran says then I cannot help you much.

 

 

1.  Why are you asking for a Qur'anic verse which states that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance when it would not apply to Fadak since Fay is not supposed to be owned by one or few individuals?

 

2.  The Qur'an does not say that Fadak was meant particularly for the Prophet [saw].  Umar [ra] said that and I have already explained that the reason why he said that was because Rasulullah [saw] took it upon himself to distribute the proceeds of Fadak to those who were declared beneficiaries in Surah Al-Hashr verse 7.

 

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment."

 

Approaching it logically, if my father gives me a candy and says that all my siblings have a share in it - since the Qur'an mentions those who have rights over Fay - then I can neither "eat it" nor "throw it".  I must only share it.  And without a shadow of a doubt, my children will not have ownership rights in inheriting this candy.

 

I cannot decide whether you are still unable to grasp the premise of this discussion or whether you deliberately commit the same error of attacking a straw man (by disregarding the verse of the Qur'an and building up your own account only to refute it yourself thereby making yourself feel good thinking that you have refuted my point).

 

3.  Please!  If anything, I was the one to bring up Surah Al-Hashr verse 7.  In another topic regarding Fadak, a brother brought the verse pertaining to "booty of war" to apply to Fadak.  I am convinced that laymen Shias like yourself do not even understand the difference between the two which is why we see them pull off the switcheroo from time to time where they claim Fadak was inheritance and then they say that it was a gift. 

 

4.  Is that desperation I sense?  If you had a point, you would have stated it.  You do not have a point which is why you are asking me to do read it again. 

 

5.  See, this is when I wish you were in front of me so that I could give you some real treatment.  It was you who brought up the issue of demi-gods but when I cornered you, the little fainting goat you are, now you want us to return back to the topic on hand.  But I will not let you off the hook this easy.

 

All of the Sahabas [ra] were fallible.  This is our belief.  Can you say that Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and the 11 Imams [ra] were fallible?  If yes, then we are good.  If not, then we know who has taken who as demi-gods.

 

6.  lol, says the guy who cannot grasp one verse, Qur'an 59:7.  Says the guy who can reference Sulaiman [as] "inheriting" horses but cannot explain how the same kingdom went from Talut [as] to Dawood [as] (two individuals not blood related to each other).  Says the guy who belongs to a school within Islam which preaches that when Qur'an 17:26 was revealed, the Prophet [saw] called Fatima [ra] and gave her Fadak.  But then we found out that Surah 17, including verse 26, was revealed in Mecca, not Madina.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  Why are you asking for a Qur'anic verse which states that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance when it would not apply to Fadak since Fay is not supposed to be owned by one or few individuals?

 

2.  The Qur'an does not say that Fadak was meant particularly for the Prophet [saw].  Umar [ra] said that and I have already explained that the reason why he said that was because Rasulullah [saw] took it upon himself to distribute the proceeds of Fadak to those who were declared beneficiaries in Surah Al-Hashr verse 7.

 

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment."

 

Approaching it logically, if my father gives me a candy and says that all my siblings have a share in it - since the Qur'an mentions those who have rights over Fay - then I can neither "eat it" nor "throw it".  I must only share it.  And without a shadow of a doubt, my children will not have ownership rights in inheriting this candy.

 

I cannot decide whether you are still unable to grasp the premise of this discussion or whether you deliberately commit the same error of attacking a straw man (by disregarding the verse of the Qur'an and building up your own account only to refute it yourself thereby making yourself feel good thinking that you have refuted my point).

 

3.  Please!  If anything, I was the one to bring up Surah Al-Hashr verse 7.  In another topic regarding Fadak, a brother brought the verse pertaining to "booty of war" to apply to Fadak.  I am convinced that laymen Shias like yourself do not even understand the difference between the two which is why we see them pull off the switcheroo from time to time where they claim Fadak was inheritance and then they say that it was a gift. 

 

4.  Is that desperation I sense?  If you had a point, you would have stated it.  You do not have a point which is why you are asking me to do read it again. 

 

5.  See, this is when I wish you were in front of me so that I could give you some real treatment.  It was you who brought up the issue of demi-gods but when I cornered you, the little fainting goat you are, now you want us to return back to the topic on hand.  But I will not let you off the hook this easy.

 

All of the Sahabas [ra] were fallible.  This is our belief.  Can you say that Imam Ali [ra], Fatima [ra] and the 11 Imams [ra] were fallible?  If yes, then we are good.  If not, then we know who has taken who as demi-gods.

 

6.  lol, says the guy who cannot grasp one verse, Qur'an 59:7.  Says the guy who can reference Sulaiman [as] "inheriting" horses but cannot explain how the same kingdom went from Talut [as] to Dawood [as] (two individuals not blood related to each other).  Says the guy who belongs to a school within Islam which preaches that when Qur'an 17:26 was revealed, the Prophet [saw] called Fatima [ra] and gave her Fadak.  But then we found out that Surah 17, including verse 26, was revealed in Mecca, not Madina.

 

 

I am asking you for a verse because your interpretation of Fai is completely false and none of the people who lived during the revelation of Quran ever interpreted fai that way. It is not rocket science to comprehend what you are trying to say about fai is far from the truth.

 

If Umar had understood the meaning of Fai from Quran as you have then he would have stated that it was meant for the poor and needy & not use the words particularly meant for the Prophet (pbuh). Add to that, he also states that the Prophet (pbuh) used to meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons. So your desperate logic defies what Umar has narrated here. If it was as you make it to be then Prophet (pbuh) should have spent on ummah first and what remained should have been spent on his family. Given that he didn't, it is very obvious that it is you who is clutching at straws to make a moot point which is not even supported by your own caliph. Please tell us whose interpretation should we go by here? Your's or your caliph's?

 

So again, try reading the narration and the Quranic verse to understand the real meaning of Fai instead of assuming incorrect things. It's not that difficult.

 

Another desperate attempt. You are defending the crimes of your demi-gods and stick to it. If you have questions about anyone else then open a new thread and ask your questions there. I have seen how cunningly you have diverted other topics in the past and to your disappointment I am not going to do it here.

 

You believe all sahabas were fallible but find it hard to accept that they could have been wrong somewhere. Wow!! What sort of a fallibility is that? 

 

 

More assumptions from you but still you do not have the guts to man up and say that there is no verse excluding the kin of the prophets from inheritance in Quran. Instead, I see a lame and desperate attempt of misinterpreting fai when the question was not just about Fadak. It goes to show how deceitful you are and how misled the people from your school in Islam are.

 

 

Enough of chasing the tail, Do you agree that there is no verse which excludes the kin of the prophets from the verses of inheritance in Quran?

 

 

Once again, let me remind you about the Quranic verse:

 

[Yusufali 4:11] Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.

 

 

 

Your poor defense here means that the below verse outlines the fate of the people whose crimes you are defending here.

 

[Yusufali 4:10Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire!

 

 

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  I am asking you for a verse because your interpretation of Fai is completely false and none of the people who lived during the revelation of Quran ever interpreted fai that way. It is not rocket science to comprehend what you are trying to say about fai is far from the truth.

 

2.  If Umar had understood the meaning of Fai from Quran as you have then he would have stated that it was meant for the poor and needy & not use the words particularly meant for the Prophet (pbuh).

 

3.  Add to that, he also states that the Prophet (pbuh) used to meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons.   So your desperate logic defies what Umar has narrated here. If it was as you make it to be then Prophet (pbuh) should have spent on ummah first and what remained should have been spent on his family.

 

4.  Given that he didn't, it is very obvious that it is you who is clutching at straws to make a moot point which is not even supported by your own caliph. Please tell us whose interpretation should we go by here? Your's or your caliph's?

5.  Another desperate attempt. You are defending the crimes of your demi-gods and stick to it. If you have questions about anyone else then open a new thread and ask your questions there.

 

6.  You believe all sahabas were fallible but find it hard to accept that they could have been wrong somewhere. Wow!! What sort of a fallibility is that? 

 

 

7.  More assumptions from you but still you do not have the guts to man up and say that there is no verse excluding the kin of the prophets from inheritance in Quran.

 

8.  Enough of chasing the tail,

 

9.  Your poor defense here means that the below verse outlines the fate of the people whose crimes you are defending here.

 

[Yusufali 4:10Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire!

 

 

1.  How can you ask for a verse from the Qur'an - regarding inheritance concerning the kin of Prophets [asws] - when you cannot even comprehend the one regarding Fay?  Before you demand for a verse which states that "Prophets do not leave inheritance" or equivalent, you must be at a level to comment on the verse regarding Fay.  Time and again, you have disregarded the verse.  Either you do not believe in it or you are ignoring it to keep yourself relevant and your argument alive.

 

2.  After having been corrected, this is the second time, if not third, that you are regurgitating your verbal diarrhea.  Umar [ra] said that Fadak was meant for the Prophet [saw] since he undertook the distribution of its proceeds.  Funny that you claim that I should accept narrations in their entirety and we see you dissect narrations to your advantage.  The land was meant for the Prophet [saw] who, as the leader of Muslims, was responsible for distributing from it, as the narration states.

 

In fact, anything that was correct during the lifetime of the Prophet [saw] can be continued after he left the body.  That is precisely why Abu Bakr [ra] said:

 

"Al-Zuhri narrated from ‘Urwa that narrated 'Aisha: Fatima and Al 'Abbas came to Abu Bakr, seeking their share from the property of Allah's Messenger and at that time, they were asking for their land at Fadak and their share from Khaibar.  Abu Bakr said to them, " I have heard from Allah's Messenger saying, 'Our property cannot be inherited, and whatever we leave is to be spent in charity, but the family of Muhammad may take their provisions from this property."  Abu Bakr added, "By Allah, I will not leave the procedure I saw Allah's Messenger following during his lifetime concerning this property."  He said:  Therefore Fatima left Abu Bakr and did not speak to him till she died."

 

Hence, Abu Bakr [ra] upheld the sunnah of the Prophet [saw] and he never prevented anyone to take from the proceeds of Fadak since he said, "but the family of Muhammad may take their provisions from this property". 

 

3.  What difference does it make?  Whether the Prophet [saw] purchased weapons first and then met the expenditure of his family or the other way around, it means nothing as long as all the criteria were satisfied.  He [saw] set aside a portion for his family and the rest he used to purchase weapons and horses.  That, in of itself, shatters the lie that Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra].  Furthermore, the two narrations - the one you are latching on to and the one I have quoted - are in my favor, not yours.  But if only you had an ounce of honesty.

 

4.  I empathize with your desperate attempts.  This is what happens when you take fallibles as infallibles.  The verse regarding Fay and the two narrations are in perfect harmony.  But now you want to look at the order in which setting aside annual expenditure for the Prophet's [saw] family and spending on weapons were mentioned in order to buy some time.  Trust me, you are not even fooling yourself and you know this deep down.

 

5.  Open another topic?  I'll carve you open right here.  You took a bite you could not swallow.  I will make you eat your words.

 

6.  Again, all Sahabas [ra] were fallible.  Can you say that Imam Ali [ra], his wife and 11 Imams [ra] were fallible?  If yes, then we are good.  Otherwise, you have taken them up as demi-gods; a charge you have wrongfully leveled against me. 

 

7.  The different mentions of inheritance, when it comes to Prophets [asws], brought up in the Qur'an all have a common message: it is wisdom, prophethood and/or book that is inherited.  As is the practice to look into hadiths next - a common trend which you, all of a sudden, are abolishing - Shia and Sunni hadiths are in agreement that "Prophets do not leave inheritance" some going as far as mentioning that they do not leave "dinars or dirhams", in other words, nothing of material value, not even money.  To compound on this, Fadak was Fay and Fay cannot have one or few exclusive owners.  So while there is no unambiguous verse in the Qur'an, the matter is pretty clear.  Neither do the Prophets [asws] leave inheritance nor can Fadak have a sole owner.  Therefore, Fatima [ra] could neither have inherited Fadak nor acquire it as a gift.

 

8.  Exactly what I have been telling you.  Stop chasing your tail and acknowledge that Fay can neither be inherited nor gifted.  I am sure you will never admit that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance when it is as clear in Shia texts as daylight.

 

9.  "Do not curse my Companions.  Whoever curses them, the curse of Allah and the angels and all people is on him.  Allah will not accept any recompense or counterweight from him."

 

Was Abu Bakr [ra] a righteous companion?  I will allow the Qur'an to speak after which I know you will show your animosity towards the Qur'an by casting doubt upon the verse or by totally disregarding it.

 

If ye help not (your leader), (it is no matter): for God did indeed help him, when the Unbelievers drove him out: he had no more than one companion; they two were in the cave, and he said to his companion, "Have no fear, for God is with us": then God sent down His peace upon him, and strengthened him with forces which ye saw not, and humbled to the depths the word of the Unbelievers. But the word of God is exalted to the heights: for God is Exalted in might, Wise.

 

Go ahead and tell us that it is talking about Imam Ali [ra] who was left behind and disregard the part which says that he had no more than "ONE COMPANION, THEY TWO WERE IN THE CAVE AND HE SAID TO HIS COMPANION" meaning the Prophet's [saw] only companion at the moment was present with him in the cave.

 

Compare and contrast this with how Musa [asws] responded to those whom he delivered from Pharaoh.

 

And when the two bodies saw each other, the people of Moses said: "We are sure to be overtaken."  (Moses) said: "By no means! my Lord is with me! Soon will He guide me!"  (Qur'an 26:62)

 

Having said all that, I am sure you will eat your heart out over this post many times over.  Try your best to deceive everyone reading all this but trust me, you are getting no where with it.  Speaking of getting no where, I will be on a cross-country road trip for the next 2 weeks.  So happy miserable days to you while I set out on my journey :)

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  How can you ask for a verse from the Qur'an - regarding inheritance concerning the kin of Prophets [asws] - when you cannot even comprehend the one regarding Fay?  Before you demand for a verse which states that "Prophets do not leave inheritance" or equivalent, you must be at a level to comment on the verse regarding Fay.  Time and again, you have disregarded the verse.  Either you do not believe in it or you are ignoring it to keep yourself relevant and your argument alive.

 

2.  After having been corrected, this is the second time, if not third, that you are regurgitating your verbal diarrhea.  Umar [ra] said that Fadak was meant for the Prophet [saw] since he undertook the distribution of its proceeds.  Funny that you claim that I should accept narrations in their entirety and we see you dissect narrations to your advantage.  The land was meant for the Prophet [saw] who, as the leader of Muslims, was responsible for distributing from it, as the narration states.

 

In fact, anything that was correct during the lifetime of the Prophet [saw] can be continued after he left the body.  That is precisely why Abu Bakr [ra] said:

 

"Al-Zuhri narrated from ‘Urwa that narrated 'Aisha: Fatima and Al 'Abbas came to Abu Bakr, seeking their share from the property of Allah's Messenger and at that time, they were asking for their land at Fadak and their share from Khaibar.  Abu Bakr said to them, " I have heard from Allah's Messenger saying, 'Our property cannot be inherited, and whatever we leave is to be spent in charity, but the family of Muhammad may take their provisions from this property."  Abu Bakr added, "By Allah, I will not leave the procedure I saw Allah's Messenger following during his lifetime concerning this property."  He said:  Therefore Fatima left Abu Bakr and did not speak to him till she died."

 

Hence, Abu Bakr [ra] upheld the sunnah of the Prophet [saw] and he never prevented anyone to take from the proceeds of Fadak since he said, "but the family of Muhammad may take their provisions from this property". 

 

3.  What difference does it make?  Whether the Prophet [saw] purchased weapons first and then met the expenditure of his family or the other way around, it means nothing as long as all the criteria were satisfied.  He [saw] set aside a portion for his family and the rest he used to purchase weapons and horses.  That, in of itself, shatters the lie that Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra].  Furthermore, the two narrations - the one you are latching on to and the one I have quoted - are in my favor, not yours.  But if only you had an ounce of honesty.

 

4.  I empathize with your desperate attempts.  This is what happens when you take fallibles as infallibles.  The verse regarding Fay and the two narrations are in perfect harmony.  But now you want to look at the order in which setting aside annual expenditure for the Prophet's [saw] family and spending on weapons were mentioned in order to buy some time.  Trust me, you are not even fooling yourself and you know this deep down.

 

5.  Open another topic?  I'll carve you open right here.  You took a bite you could not swallow.  I will make you eat your words.

 

6.  Again, all Sahabas [ra] were fallible.  Can you say that Imam Ali [ra], his wife and 11 Imams [ra] were fallible?  If yes, then we are good.  Otherwise, you have taken them up as demi-gods; a charge you have wrongfully leveled against me. 

 

7.  The different mentions of inheritance, when it comes to Prophets [asws], brought up in the Qur'an all have a common message: it is wisdom, prophethood and/or book that is inherited.  As is the practice to look into hadiths next - a common trend which you, all of a sudden, are abolishing - Shia and Sunni hadiths are in agreement that "Prophets do not leave inheritance" some going as far as mentioning that they do not leave "dinars or dirhams", in other words, nothing of material value, not even money.  To compound on this, Fadak was Fay and Fay cannot have one or few exclusive owners.  So while there is no unambiguous verse in the Qur'an, the matter is pretty clear.  Neither do the Prophets [asws] leave inheritance nor can Fadak have a sole owner.  Therefore, Fatima [ra] could neither have inherited Fadak nor acquire it as a gift.

 

8.  Exactly what I have been telling you.  Stop chasing your tail and acknowledge that Fay can neither be inherited nor gifted.  I am sure you will never admit that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance when it is as clear in Shia texts as daylight.

 

9.  "Do not curse my Companions.  Whoever curses them, the curse of Allah and the angels and all people is on him.  Allah will not accept any recompense or counterweight from him."

 

Was Abu Bakr [ra] a righteous companion?  I will allow the Qur'an to speak after which I know you will show your animosity towards the Qur'an by casting doubt upon the verse or by totally disregarding it.

 

If ye help not (your leader), (it is no matter): for God did indeed help him, when the Unbelievers drove him out: he had no more than one companion; they two were in the cave, and he said to his companion, "Have no fear, for God is with us": then God sent down His peace upon him, and strengthened him with forces which ye saw not, and humbled to the depths the word of the Unbelievers. But the word of God is exalted to the heights: for God is Exalted in might, Wise.

 

Go ahead and tell us that it is talking about Imam Ali [ra] who was left behind and disregard the part which says that he had no more than "ONE COMPANION, THEY TWO WERE IN THE CAVE AND HE SAID TO HIS COMPANION" meaning the Prophet's [saw] only companion at the moment was present with him in the cave.

 

Compare and contrast this with how Musa [asws] responded to those whom he delivered from Pharaoh.

 

And when the two bodies saw each other, the people of Moses said: "We are sure to be overtaken."  (Moses) said: "By no means! my Lord is with me! Soon will He guide me!"  (Qur'an 26:62)

 

Having said all that, I am sure you will eat your heart out over this post many times over.  Try your best to deceive everyone reading all this but trust me, you are getting no where with it.  Speaking of getting no where, I will be on a cross-country road trip for the next 2 weeks.  So happy miserable days to you while I set out on my journey :)

 

You are a shameless liar. Allah swt says in Quran that everyone is entitled to inheritance from their parents. But you say that kin of the Prophets have no share of inheritance. So clearly, you must have a verse to support your assumption otherwise your lies has been exposed for the Millionth time.

 

 

When asked to present a verse, you are chasing your tail and bringing up an incorrect translation of the verse Fai. As I told you previously, I am talking of Prophets and not Fadak here. Let's keep aside Fai for one moment, do you have a verse to support your stance that the children of the prophets (Pay close attention to the word Prophets and not just Prophet) cannot inherit?

 

 

Your lack of comprehension of the words of your own caliph are pretty evident from the fact that you are stating contrary to what he has said and to add to that, despite being corrected so many times you are still continuing with your fairy tales. Exactly my point which I have been stating for so long, you need to read the complete narration instead of cherry picking parts of narrations and jumping narrations to prove that the lies you are stating is correct, Umar said "These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him). He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons". 

 

Open your eyes and read what your caliph has said. He said the Poperty was particularly meant for the Prophet (pbuh) who would spend the income of it on his family first. It is clear to everyone that you are either playing dumb by portraying that this is too hard for you to comprehend or you actually are dumb. Either way, it doesn't change the fact that Fai was particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and he (pbuh) would only spend what was left over (after spending on his family) to prepare for jihad. So in this case, Abu Bakr went against the words of Allah swt & the actions of the Prophet (pbuh). You have made my life simpler by presenting the narration which did more harm to you than you could have imagined.

 

 

The difference as you clearly cannot see is because of the blind love you have for your demi Gods (You want us to believe that you believe they are fallible but do not accept that they made mistakes. Incredible fallibility!). A simple English statement is now too difficult for you to comprehend. Clearly, your deception is too evident and your choice of words are making you look more desperate than ever. Kept aside a portion??? Who said that? Read the narration again, it says only what remained was spent on the purchasing of horses & weapons. If you had looked at it honestly you would know for yourself that there is a big difference in what you are claiming and what your caliph has narrated. But it looks like what little honesty was left even that has deserted you completely.

 

 

It is clear, you do not believe that all Sahabas were fallible because if you did then you would have seen through the light to have understood that Abu Bakr was indeed wrong to have gone against Allah's swt words and the Prophet's (pbuh) as I have proven from Quran and narrations from your own books. I sometimes pity people like you who are so far away from the truth that there seems to be no point of return for them. But as Allah swt has said, only He has all the power to guide those whom He wills.

 

 

Very poor defense again. You bring the incident of cave here when we all know that this is no virtue of Abu Bakr. Infact he was not even supposed to be travelling with the Prophet (pbuh). Since this has been debated to death many a times and to steer clear of your dubious ways of diverting the topic, I will just let you know that even the people who were with Prophet Yusuf in prison have been referred to as his companions in Quran. That doesn't give them an iota of virtue.

 

 

Again, you are repeating a lie just to make your point, this despite being corrected so many times. Any fool can take a narration out of context and keep repeating the same. With you it is no different. Shia narrations do not talk of Prophets not leaving inheritance. You would have known if you had read that Shia narration or for that matter any narration with the context in mind. But what can be expected of you apart from dishonesty, deceit and lies?

 

 

One verse is all I asked for. As you have no qualms in even going against the Quran, I see no point in continuing with this any further. You want me to over rule a Quranic verse based on two narrations, one which has been concocted by an individual and the other which you take out of context because you have not read the book you are quoting it from to understand under which section it is narrated.

 

I will continue this discussion if and only if you can bring one verse to counter the verse of inheritance I have presented, otherwise I rest my case by presenting what Allah says in the Quran about the people whose crimes you are defending here:

 

 

[Yusufali 4:10Those who unjustly eat up the property of orphans, eat up a Fire into their own bodies: They will soon be enduring a Blazing Fire!

 

 

P.S: Remember, I said bring one verse and not a narration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

 

Having said all that, I am sure you will eat your heart out over this post many times over.  Try your best to deceive everyone reading all this but trust me, you are getting no where with it.  Speaking of getting no where, I will be on a cross-country road trip for the next 2 weeks.  So happy miserable days to you while I set out on my journey :)

 

If you think people here are not aware of your deceitful characteristics then let me break your imaginary bubble because everyone knows that your posts are nothing but BS. They are full of grossly incorrect translations of Quranic verses and narrations taken out of context. So it is actually a joy (at-least for 2 weeks) to not be reading your miserable & fictitious posts. You have definitely spared everyone reading this thread the misery of reading your deceitful posts. Hopefully when you get back you will answer the questions asked to the point instead of going around in circles and wasting everyone's time. And, oh yeah, enjoy your 2 weeks of cross-country road trip as they are 2 more weeks of your life spent in forced ignorance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's fascinating to read the comments herein, I believe both sects are misled and you people believe whatever is written down in your additional books is 100% authentic (Shiites don't believe their books are authentic). Attaching the label "Sahih" to your extra books will not make your books authentic  :no:. What's crucial is the authorization from Allah the Exalted

shaytaan  :shaytan:  (la) did a nice work in dividing Islam and tickling human beings such as Bukhari and Shi'a "scholars" to lead the masses astray from the path of Allah the Exalted. What they recorded is to be thrown away in the dustbin or scrutinized. 

 

Do I believe in the history of Islam contained in the "Sahihayn" - NO! 

Allah the Exalted has not disclosed in the Qur'an anything about the companions or about the so-called history. Hence all what is said in this regard is nothing but conjecture and scum to be discarded straight away in line with the injunction not to pursue about which we do not have the knowledge. 

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The Prophet (pbuh) prophesied to the Muslim martyrs of Uhud that they would go to Heaven.

So, Abu Bakr wondered: "Aren't we their brothers who have submitted to Islam just as they did, and fought in jihad just as they did; so, why don't you give us the good news that we will go to heaven? The Prophet (pbuh) said: "It is absolutely true that you are their brothers, but I do not know what you will do after my death".

- Al Muatta of Malik Ibn Anas, Vol II, Page 642

This is the complete hadith and check the last sentence:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'n-Nadr, the mawla of Umar ibn Ubaydullah that he had heard that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said over the martyrs of Uhud, "I testify for them." Abu Bakr as-Siddiq said, "Messenger of Allah! Are we not their brothers? We entered Islam as they entered Islam and we did jihad as they did jihad." The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Yes, but I do not know what you will do after me." Abu Bakr wept profusely and said, "Are we really going to out-live you!"  

Malik's Muwatta (Book #21, Hadith #21.14.32)

From that moment on Abu Bakr must have made a plan in his mind to usurp the rulership after the death of the Prophet (pbuh). 

 

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...