Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
faris88_

Were The Imams Infallible ?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

it is the claim of many that all the 12 Imams were infallible and could not make any mistake ever in their lives. if we accept this belief then how come Hazrat Hassan (RA) gave the Khilafah to Hazrat Muawiya (RA) ??? if it was not a mistake then why don`t Shias accept the Khilafah of Hazrat Muawiya (RA) ? and if it was a mistake then how come anyone could claim the imams were infallible ??? sincere answers and use of respectable language is expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could the prophet (sawws) make a peace treaty at hudaybia with the people of mekka? Imam hassan (as) did the same as the prophet (sawws), did the prophet do a mistake? And do u even know the reason for imam hassans (as) action? if u don't then go educate yourself. And how can u say (ra) to muawiya??? Don't make me curse him. He fought YOUR "rightly guided caliphs" isn't that kufr? You sunnis truly love the enemies of the prophet and his family (as).

May the curse of Allah be upon the enemies of the prophet and his family, ameen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been a mistake if he had any choice in the matter. Imam Hasan had no 'Khilafah' to give to Muawiya. He didn't have any followers, so to claim that he had the control and allegiance of millions of Muslims is absurd. Imam Hasan had no choice but to withdraw his claim to his right of Khilafah. Do you really believe that if Imam Hasan had an army and resources, he wouldn't have fought the Banu Umayyah like his father Ali and brother Hussain? Do you really believe that he made the choice out of his own accord.

 

Anyways, did not the Prophet negotiate a treaty with the Kuffar at Hudaybia? Will you call this a mistake too?

 

 

There have been countless books written on this matter. If you are truly trying to seek an answer to this question (and not just spreading fitnah) then read through this link:

 

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/muawiya/peace-treaty-with-imam-hasan.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pointless asking these questions because every action can be justified. Human imagination is endless and theologians had over a thousand years to come up with explanations. If you want to believe that the Prophets and Imams are infallible then your mind will find a rational basis for it; you just got to be a bit creative.

Edited by Sea Ocean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been a mistake if he had any choice in the matter. Imam Hasan had no 'Khilafah' to give to Muawiya. He didn't have any followers, so to claim that he had the control and allegiance of millions of Muslims is absurd. Imam Hasan had no choice but to withdraw his claim to his right of Khilafah. Do you really believe that if Imam Hasan had an army and resources, he wouldn't have fought the Banu Umayyah like his father Ali and brother Hussain? Do you really believe that he made the choice out of his own accord.

 

Anyways, did not the Prophet negotiate a treaty with the Kuffar at Hudaybia? Will you call this a mistake too?

 

 

There have been countless books written on this matter. If you are truly trying to seek an answer to this question (and not just spreading fitnah) then read through this link:

 

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/muawiya/peace-treaty-with-imam-hasan.html

 

You talking to someone who does not want to hear the truth.

 

It is hard for a Sunni to comprehend this fact when they do not even believe the Prophet pbuh/hf was even born infallible. Makes you wonder really what kind of real solid loyalty is held in the heart of a person who claims to be a follower of even the Prophet but cannot come to terms with his infallibility.

 

They question every act an Imam does even if the Imam takes the same decisions as the Prophet pbuh/hf which really says alot about what kind of follower this person really is.

 

 

it is the claim of many that all the 12 Imams were infallible and could not make any mistake ever in their lives. if we accept this belief then how come Hazrat Hassan (ra) gave the Khilafah to Hazrat Muawiya (ra) ??? if it was not a mistake then why don`t Shias accept the Khilafah of Hazrat Muawiya (ra) ? and if it was a mistake then how come anyone could claim the imams were infallible ??? sincere answers and use of respectable language is expected.

 

You ask for the truth but do not have the audacity to hear it.

 

Your one of those who is a follower of Muawiya the cursed whos mother ate the liver of the uncle of the Prophet pbuh/hf. I find it really strange when someone can even in today's day and age after knowing everything that has happened in the past show respect for such an individual.

 

If it was not for the Ahlul Bayt a.s. Islam will have had a complete different direction. How can you even follow a Khalifa that knows nothing about this magnificent religion. There has never been a Khalifa apart from Imam Ali a.s that was in a position to answer any and every question ever asked of him. Does this not have any meaning to you?

 

Now I have a 2 questions for you: what proof do you have that the Imams a.s are not infallible and what proof do you have that the Quran shows that a Khalifa has the right to change any laws the Prophet pbuh/hf has put down?

 

One issue that really puzzles me is regarding Imam Al Mehdi a.s, the Sunnis believe that he will be from the Ahlul Bayt from the line of Fatima a.s and Imam Ali a.s right?  so in this Sunni hadith you accept that the Ahlul Bayt a.s is from Fatima a.s and Imam Ali however when questioned about the Ahlul Bayt  that was mentioned by the Prophet pbuh/hf you say it is the wives of the Prophet and not that of Fatima a.s and Imam Ali a.s, It is very convenient for you to pick and choose when to accept Ahlul Bayt a.s as Fatima a.s and Imam Ali a.s and when to say it is not them. This is typical for someone of your nature however very disappointing.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pointless asking these questions because every action can be justified. Human imagination is endless and theologians had over a thousand years to come up with explanations. If you want to believe that the Prophets and Imams are infallible then your mind will find a rational basis for it; you just got to be a bit creative.

 

An infallible life can be created? Dozens of years, millions of opportunities to commit sins and not a single blatant mistake- can imagination make that up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lahawl Bila Quata illa Billa ...

 

Now i got one point, why things are not getting solved. Every day new kid is getting born and every day he want to repeat that 1400+ year history with his confused theories on Islam.

 

These kids will produce more confused kids and all confused will come and open one more thread ... Why  Mamu Mauwiya is getting hated by Shias ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An infallible life can be created? Dozens of years, millions of opportunities to commit sins and not a single blatant mistake- can imagination make that up?

 

It's rather more difficult than that, my friend. Why do you think theologians have written books to justify their conception of infallibility? Not just Muslim theologians but other religions too (yeah, they too have their fair share of infallible Saints and Gurus). Maybe you should look those up to appreciate the paradoxes they had to resolve... or tried to resolve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lahawl Bila Quata illa Billa ...

 

Now i got one point, why things are not getting solved. Every day new kid is getting born and every day he want to repeat that 1400+ year history with his confused theories on Islam.

 

These kids will produce more confused kids and all confused will come and open one more thread ... Why  Mamu Mauwiya is getting hated by Shias ?

 

LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been a mistake if he had any choice in the matter. Imam Hasan had no 'Khilafah' to give to Muawiya. He didn't have any followers, so to claim that he had the control and allegiance of millions of Muslims is absurd. Imam Hasan had no choice but to withdraw his claim to his right of Khilafah. Do you really believe that if Imam Hasan had an army and resources, he wouldn't have fought the Banu Umayyah like his father Ali and brother Hussain? Do you really believe that he made the choice out of his own accord.

 

Anyways, did not the Prophet negotiate a treaty with the Kuffar at Hudaybia? Will you call this a mistake too?

 

 

There have been countless books written on this matter. If you are truly trying to seek an answer to this question (and not just spreading fitnah) then read through this link:

 

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/muawiya/peace-treaty-with-imam-hasan.html

first of all who are you to say im spreadin fitnah here ??? if questioning shia beliefs will be regarded as spreading fitnah here then you better close this section of the forum because it is here to facilitate the dialogue between Sunni and Shia Muslims. so if this makes you guys upset then you better not join this section of the forum because just like hundreds of questions have been raised on sunni beliefs, Shia beliefs will be questioned too and you are no one to call me Fitnah monger here so don`t try to distract people from the topic.if you are here to LOL around then find another thread for it.

 

now talking about the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah then we all know Allah swt said in Surah Al-Fath it was a clear victory for the Muslims.if you are aware of that then your comparision between the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and the decision of Al Hassan (ra) to give his part of the khilafah to Muawiya (ra) by this you are only proving that his decision was right and it his al Hassan`s (ra) victory.

this raises another question if people would just think about for 10 minutes but unfortunately most of the Muslims refuse to think with the brains Allah swt has blessed them.we all know that according to Shia sources Nauzubillah Muawiya was not even a Muslim and this is the view of most of the shia Muslims regarding him,i don`t even have to show here what most of you think about him because i don`t even know of how many things you accuse him.

 

so the Question is why did imam Hassan (ra) handed over the fate of thousand and thousands of Muslims in the hand of a man who nauzubillah was not even a Muslim ???  your comparison between the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and this incident indicates it was a victory for Imam Hassan (ra) but how  was it a victory for him when he let a non Muslim rule over the Muslims and their lands and who eventually killed him according to your sources. how was it a victory for Al Hassan and the Muslims '???

 

now if you will say that Imam Hassan (ra) didn`t hand enough support and resources to fight a war agaisnt him then i ask you How many supporters did Imam Hussain (ra) had when he rose against Yazeed ??? did Imam Hassan had even less followers then Imam Hussain that he had to Allah forbid surrender the Fate of the Muslims in the hands of a non Muslim ???

 

there are so many questions we can raise here which only proves you actually insult Imam Hassan (ra) by saying these things, yes you are actually  insulting the Ahle Bayt (ra) by saying these things because even a Non Muslim would agree handing all the power to rule over the muslims to a non Muslim is abolutely wrong. 

 

you are indirectly blaming Imam Hassan (RA) for all the actocities committed in the rule of Muawiya (according to shia sources) so who actually insults the Ahle bayt huh ? Rasool (SAW) agreed on some terms of the non muslims but he didn`t allowed them to rule over the Muslims but here you are accusing Imam Hassan of giving the rule to a non muslim over so many muslims only to be oppressed by him. now answer this then we will Insha Allah Proceed towards a conclusion.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason brother Faris was to show the deceit of Mouawia just like the Prophet pbuh/hf showed when he signed his peace treaty. In the time of Imam Hassan a.s , Mouawia was khalifa and the vast majority of people had the back of Mouawia due to many reasons we can put down at another time.

 

Imam Hassan a.s did not have the numbers so he did what his grandfather did and with that he showed how dishonest and corrupt Mouawia is. 

 

Mouawia did not take this agreement seriously and one of the conditions of this was that Mouawia was not allowed to put his Son Yazid as a successor and as we know Mouawia did break that condition amoungst many many many many other conditions that was agreed upon.

 

So the agreement was terminated before it even started as Mouawia could not keep his word as a real man and Muslim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You talking to someone who does not want to hear the truth.

 

It is hard for a Sunni to comprehend this fact when they do not even believe the Prophet pbuh/hf was even born infallible. Makes you wonder really what kind of real solid loyalty is held in the heart of a person who claims to be a follower of even the Prophet but cannot come to terms with his infallibility.

 

They question every act an Imam does even if the Imam takes the same decisions as the Prophet pbuh/hf which really says alot about what kind of follower this person really is.

 

 

 

You ask for the truth but do not have the audacity to hear it.

 

Your one of those who is a follower of Muawiya the cursed whos mother ate the liver of the uncle of the Prophet pbuh/hf. I find it really strange when someone can even in today's day and age after knowing everything that has happened in the past show respect for such an individual.

 

If it was not for the Ahlul Bayt a.s. Islam will have had a complete different direction. How can you even follow a Khalifa that knows nothing about this magnificent religion. There has never been a Khalifa apart from Imam Ali a.s that was in a position to answer any and every question ever asked of him. Does this not have any meaning to you?

 

Now I have a 2 questions for you: what proof do you have that the Imams a.s are not infallible and what proof do you have that the Quran shows that a Khalifa has the right to change any laws the Prophet pbuh/hf has put down?

 

One issue that really puzzles me is regarding Imam Al Mehdi a.s, the Sunnis believe that he will be from the Ahlul Bayt from the line of Fatima a.s and Imam Ali a.s right?  so in this Sunni hadith you accept that the Ahlul Bayt a.s is from Fatima a.s and Imam Ali however when questioned about the Ahlul Bayt  that was mentioned by the Prophet pbuh/hf you say it is the wives of the Prophet and not that of Fatima a.s and Imam Ali a.s, It is very convenient for you to pick and choose when to accept Ahlul Bayt a.s as Fatima a.s and Imam Ali a.s and when to say it is not them. This is typical for someone of your nature however very disappointing.

.

i don`t have the audacity to hear the truth ? do you have the audacity to tell the truth ??? first of all Sunnis do not believe Muawiya (ra) murdered Imam Hassan (ra) whether directly or indirectly we do not believe he was responsible for it in the least and we don`t put the blame on him and if we did then we wouldn`t say (ra) after his name,it`s the shia historians who accuse him of that and the Ummah does not unanimously agrees on this with the Shias, you should know that better than me. 

 

you should atleast do a little homework before writting things here. Sunnis believe the Prophets (peace be upon them all) were absolutely infallible in the conveying the Message of Allah.they never made mistake in conveying the Message of Allah swt to their nations and the All Muslims unanimously agree on this that Prophets were infallible in the conveying the Message of Allah.we believe their Past and future sins were forgiven hence they are called Masoom.

 

your last question is totally absurd because no Muslim in my knowledge denies that Imam Ali (RA) and Hazrat Fatimah (radhi Allahu Anha) are not from the Ahlal Bayt. you said that based on what ? is making baseless accusations on sunnis is your only job here on this forum ? show me who denies that they are not part of the Ahle Bayt go ahead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lahawl Bila Quata illa Billa ...

 

Now i got one point, why things are not getting solved. Every day new kid is getting born and every day he want to repeat that 1400+ year history with his confused theories on Islam.

 

These kids will produce more confused kids and all confused will come and open one more thread ... Why  Mamu Mauwiya is getting hated by Shias ?

 

Look we have limited number of posts everyday and i can`t waste a single post on off topic answers like this after this one. now let me ask you something 

who are you to disregard someone`s words based on their age ???   are knowledge and wisdom dependent upon age ? is that what you are suggesting ??? Imam Ali (RA) himself said Age does not equals knowledge so who are you to call someone a kid and laugh on him ? i`m not claiming to be knowledgeable here but i`m just clearing up this misunderstanding here that many of us have unfortunately.you think because someone is young his words should be ignored just because of his age ? we can bring someone who is less than 20 and you won`t able to speak 10 minutes in front of him. if a 10 years old came in front of you and says Shia islam is true then will you disregard what he said just because of his age ??? your argument is destroyed here in less than 2 minutes so i ask you to stop doing the work of Shaytaan and stop trying to take us off topic here because everyone here is reading your words and you are only insulting yourself by this and i already made it clear in the start that only sincere answers are expected.if you have nothing which can help proceed this thread to a conclusion then please remain silent because you are only making fun of yourself by doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason brother Faris was to show the deceit of Mouawia just like the Prophet pbuh/hf showed when he signed his peace treaty. In the time of Imam Hassan a.s , Mouawia was khalifa and the vast majority of people had the back of Mouawia due to many reasons we can put down at another time.

 

Imam Hassan a.s did not have the numbers so he did what his grandfather did and with that he showed how dishonest and corrupt Mouawia is. 

 

Mouawia did not take this agreement seriously and one of the conditions of this was that Mouawia was not allowed to put his Son Yazid as a successor and as we know Mouawia did break that condition amoungst many many many many other conditions that was agreed upon.

 

So the agreement was terminated before it even started as Mouawia could not keep his word as a real man and Muslim.

i only ask you to fear Allah brother, for the sake of your akhira fear Allah swt and don`t say something about the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) which you don`t have any idea about because if you knew anything about the incident of Hudaybiyyah you would have not said what you just said above, you implied that the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) made the treaty of Hudaybiyyah because his followers were less in numbers against the mekkans ??? you should fear Allah and refrain from making things up likes this about the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) because anyone who has the slightest knowledge regarding this incident knows that the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) left Medinah only with the intention of doing hajj and he (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) didn`t had any weapons with them. they wore their ihram and took their animals for sacrifice and let for hajj. he (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) wanted to make peace with makkans and that`s why he singed the treaty for which he even agreed to remove bismillah ir rahman ir rahim and RasulAllah from his name on treaty`s document. this incident is alone sufficient to prove he (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) was a Prophet of Peace and mercy and he agreed to do all this only to make peace in the society and everyone unanimously agrees that he wanted to make peace and therefore he singed the treaty, it was not he did because his followers were less in numbers then the kuffars but if you still persist in claiming that then i challenge you to show me one scholar from the past who says what you are saying here.

 

just for the sake of argument let`s agree here that Nauzubillah the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) agreed with the kuffars because they were more in numbers as you said above in your post, even if that was the case he didn`t gave a non Muslim the right to rule above Muslims so that kuffars may oppress and kill muslims for years but yet you accuse Imam Hassan (RA) of doing that and you also do great injustice by saying Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) also did the same in his life. 

 

and by the way anyone who knows history will tell you that Ummayads had the support of the Syrians and it`s true that Syrians had a very strong army in those times but to say Imam Hassan (RA) didn`t had any resources and followers is a balant lie because everyone knows he had the support of many muslims including the khilafah`s capital which was kufah at that time.if you say Imam Hassan (RA) did the right thing by giving lands where he hand his followers because he couldn`t match the forces of Muawiya (RA) then again you are raising questions on Imam Hussain (RA) when he marched against Yazeed. i ask you how many followers did Imam Hussain (RA) had during the rule of Yazeed ??? did that prevented him from staying on haqq ??? you see no matter what you try to defend your claim you are only strangling things and confusing the people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don`t have the audacity to hear the truth ? do you have the audacity to tell the truth ??? first of all Sunnis do not believe Muawiya (ra) murdered Imam Hassan (ra) whether directly or indirectly we do not believe he was responsible for it in the least and we don`t put the blame on him and if we did then we wouldn`t say (ra) after his name,it`s the shia historians who accuse him of that and the Ummah does not unanimously agrees on this with the Shias, you should know that better than me. 

 

you should atleast do a little homework before writting things here. Sunnis believe the Prophets (peace be upon them all) were absolutely infallible in the conveying the Message of Allah.they never made mistake in conveying the Message of Allah swt to their nations and the All Muslims unanimously agree on this that Prophets were infallible in the conveying the Message of Allah.we believe their Past and future sins were forgiven hence they are called Masoom.

 

your last question is totally absurd because no Muslim in my knowledge denies that Imam Ali (ra) and Hazrat Fatimah (radhi Allahu Anha) are not from the Ahlal Bayt. you said that based on what ? is making baseless accusations on sunnis is your only job here on this forum ? show me who denies that they are not part of the Ahle Bayt go ahead. 

 

I really do get amused with such fairy tales that you bring to this debate.

 

The point I was making in regards to the treaty the Prophet pbuh/hf was not the fact of the numbering of supporters but to root out and prove the dishonesty of the opposition.. The problem you face brother is your lack of will to comprehend what is written to what your reception picks up and that is very disappointing to say the least. I am sure you will agree that the Prophet pbuh/hf did root out and prove the dishonestly of the mekans of the time. 

 

 

What is certain is that there is a consensus among the Islamic sects on the Prophet’s infallibility regarding the reception and conveyance of revelation, but that being the case in his everyday life isn't unquestionably accepted. According to the beliefs of the Sunni school of thought, derived from their authentic resources, Sunnis do not believe in the infallibility of the Prophet regarding issues other than revelation. 

 

The Shia trust that the Prophet pbuh/hf is 100% Infallible and the Sunnis do not, there is not need to fight it brother, the above is from an actual Sunni source.

 

Now regarding Ahlul Bayt a.s, the sunnis believe that this is everyone that the Prophet pbuh/hf was related to and some even go further to say it relates to the whole clan of the Prophet pbuh/hf. 

 

My job here is not to prove you are wrong brother but to clear any misconceptions you have, I know it is hard to let go of your wrong beliefs however I think if you truly opened you heart and embraced the truth then you really be guided.

 

It would be great if you took a moment to look past your nose brother and actually tried to see the truth to the matter. I personally study many hadith from the Sunni brothers and compare to Shia. 

 

I have opened my mind and looked beyond my ignorance, can you do the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

first of all who are you to say im spreadin fitnah here ??? if questioning shia beliefs will be regarded as spreading fitnah here then you better close this section of the forum because it is here to facilitate the dialogue between Sunni and Shia Muslims. so if this makes you guys upset then you better not join this section of the forum because just like hundreds of questions have been raised on sunni beliefs, Shia beliefs will be questioned too and you are no one to call me Fitnah monger here so don`t try to distract people from the topic.if you are here to LOL around then find another thread for it.

 

now talking about the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah then we all know Allah swt said in Surah Al-Fath it was a clear victory for the Muslims.if you are aware of that then your comparision between the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and the decision of Al Hassan (ra) to give his part of the khilafah to Muawiya (ra) by this you are only proving that his decision was right and it his al Hassan`s (ra) victory.

this raises another question if people would just think about for 10 minutes but unfortunately most of the Muslims refuse to think with the brains Allah swt has blessed them.we all know that according to Shia sources Nauzubillah Muawiya was not even a Muslim and this is the view of most of the shia Muslims regarding him,i don`t even have to show here what most of you think about him because i don`t even know of how many things you accuse him.

 

so the Question is why did imam Hassan (ra) handed over the fate of thousand and thousands of Muslims in the hand of a man who nauzubillah was not even a Muslim ???  your comparison between the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and this incident indicates it was a victory for Imam Hassan (ra) but how  was it a victory for him when he let a non Muslim rule over the Muslims and their lands and who eventually killed him according to your sources. how was it a victory for Al Hassan and the Muslims '???

 

now if you will say that Imam Hassan (ra) didn`t hand enough support and resources to fight a war agaisnt him then i ask you How many supporters did Imam Hussain (ra) had when he rose against Yazeed ??? did Imam Hassan had even less followers then Imam Hussain that he had to Allah forbid surrender the Fate of the Muslims in the hands of a non Muslim ???

 

there are so many questions we can raise here which only proves you actually insult Imam Hassan (ra) by saying these things, yes you are actually  insulting the Ahle Bayt (ra) by saying these things because even a Non Muslim would agree handing all the power to rule over the muslims to a non Muslim is abolutely wrong. 

 

you are indirectly blaming Imam Hassan (ra) for all the actocities committed in the rule of Muawiya (according to shia sources) so who actually insults the Ahle bayt huh ? Rasool (SAW) agreed on some terms of the non muslims but he didn`t allowed them to rule over the Muslims but here you are accusing Imam Hassan of giving the rule to a non muslim over so many muslims only to be oppressed by him. now answer this then we will Insha Allah Proceed towards a conclusion.

 

Regards

 

Brother, I never said you were spreading fitnah. I only said that if you didn't read through the article, it would prove that you were not actually trying to seek the answer to the question. Have you read through the link? It seems not, as the questions you are asking again and again are clearly answered there.

 

You do not seem to know much about the Treaty of Hudaybia. You are saying that the Prophet made peace with the Kuffar and it somehow didn't effect the fate of any Muslim. What is the purpose of a treaty like this the, if it does not have any effect? Did not the Treaty of Hudaybia contain a clause which stated that any Muslim who fled from Mecca would be returned into the hands of the Kuffar, while someone fleeing from Medina to Mecca wouldn't be returned? Is this not 'affecting the fate of Muslims'?

 

I quote the following verse (8:61):

 

8_61.png
Sahih International
And if they [the enemy] incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.

 

 

 

Also, I have a question for you:

If Muawiyah is capable of (nauzubillah) being called  (ra) , why did he break the famously-recorded clause of the treaty which stated that he could not name a successor?

Edited by Patience101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look we have limited number of posts everyday and i can`t waste a single post on off topic answers like this after this one. now let me ask you something 

who are you to disregard someone`s words based on their age ???   are knowledge and wisdom dependent upon age ? is that what you are suggesting ??? Imam Ali (ra) himself said Age does not equals knowledge so who are you to call someone a kid and laugh on him ? i`m not claiming to be knowledgeable here but i`m just clearing up this misunderstanding here that many of us have unfortunately.you think because someone is young his words should be ignored just because of his age ? we can bring someone who is less than 20 and you won`t able to speak 10 minutes in front of him. if a 10 years old came in front of you and says Shia islam is true then will you disregard what he said just because of his age ??? your argument is destroyed here in less than 2 minutes so i ask you to stop doing the work of Shaytaan and stop trying to take us off topic here because everyone here is reading your words and you are only insulting yourself by this and i already made it clear in the start that only sincere answers are expected.if you have nothing which can help proceed this thread to a conclusion then please remain silent because you are only making fun of yourself by doing it.

 

Do you know why posts set to limited ? Bcoz all stupids are jumping and opening same Subject every day without even using there brain to search and find the last discussion. Due to that Admin limited the post for every one, so that all so called Intelligent get limited to show there Intelligence in a better way. 

 

You are poking nose on an Issue which was discussed many many many many many many times, we are 1400+ year away from that Incident. And we are facing Today's Mauwiya in the name of ISIS and Al Qaeda. Both of them are Follower of Mauwiya, they praise Ummaya Dinesty and they love Ummaya Dinesty. And you are also indicating you love Mamu Mauwiya that is why instead of Lanat you want that murderer into Heaven :D

 

And rest part of your post indicate , Fire which you want to ignite return back and burned your Bumpers :!!!:

 

If you really want to understand age then Imam Ali (as) was young and more knowledgeable then the rest Caliph , and every brain want a Knowledgeable ruler instead of Old one. Either age matters then Imam Ali (as) should be first caliph or You are under age :lol: for 1400+ year old incident to understand.

 

A healthy contribution from me is .. Go read Sulah Hudaibyah first and then check why Imam Hasan (as) done the Sulah with Muawiya. Either you are confused in Sulah Hudaibiyah too like the 2nd one , or you really want something else which i caught and put the fire back in bumpers.

Edited by alirex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know why posts set to limited ? Bcoz all stupids are jumping and opening same Subject every day without even using there brain to search and find the last discussion. Due to that Admin limited the post for every one, so that all so called Intelligent get limited to show there Intelligence in a better way. 

 

You are poking nose on an Issue which was discussed many many many many many many times, we are 1400+ year away from that Incident. And we are facing Today's Mauwiya in the name of ISIS and Al Qaeda. Both of them are Follower of Mauwiya, they praise Ummaya Dinesty and they love Ummaya Dinesty. And you are also indicating you love Mamu Mauwiya that is why instead of Lanat you want that murderer into Heaven :D

 

And rest part of your post indicate , Fire which you want to ignite return back and burned your Bumpers :!!!:

 

If you really want to understand age then Imam Ali (as) was young and more knowledgeable then the rest Caliph , and every brain want a Knowledgeable ruler instead of Old one. Either age matters then Imam Ali (as) should be first caliph or You are under age :lol: for 1400+ year old incident to understand.

 

A healthy contribution from me is .. Go read Sulah Hudaibyah first and then check why Imam Hasan (as) done the Sulah with Muawiya. Either you are confused in Sulah Hudaibiyah too like the 2nd one , or you really want something else which i caught and put the fire back in bumpers.

 

i love u bro  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 first of all Sunnis do not believe Muawiya (ra) murdered Imam Hassan (ra) whether directly or indirectly we do not believe he was responsible...............

 

From when you got the Authority on behalf of All Sunnis ? Go check Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat KhanQah , they are openly cursing Mauwiya , they looks more Sunni then rest ... bcoz They are following proper Sunnah of Rasool Allah (pbuh) they are cursing that person who done all bad to destroy Islam. And its really Pathetic to see Every kid is jumping and trying to represent All Sunnis ... We Sunni never believes this and that  ... Lols

 

If really one geneuine sunni will read this and know your address ... Then God only can save you Nephew of Mamu

Edited by alirex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i love u bro  :D

Please don't love me when i am angry its not what Love actually means.

 

Love me when i am behaving like Imam Ali (as).

 

At the moment i am Anti-Umayya Dinesty Lovers. :shaytan:

 

but continuous these Ummaya Lovers made me angry. Really how pathetic they are thinking , they care more for those who are Anti-Islam and never left there path .. They killed Imam Hasan, they killed Imam Hussain .. they tried so many Attack on Imam Ali (as) .. every where they tried to destory Islam, and now these Backstabbers from there generation came to praise those Cruels.

 

For sure these are getting lesson in there Mosques to praise Mauwiya every where .. And they will later join ISIS and Al Qaeda and will kill Innocent Muslims ( Follower of True Islam the one which came from Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) )

Edited by alirex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't love me when i am angry its not what Love actually means.

 

Love me when i am behaving like Imam Ali (as).

 

At the moment i am Anti-Umayya Dinesty Lovers. :shaytan:

 

but continuous these Ummaya Lovers made me angry. Really how pathetic they are thinking , they care more for those who are Anti-Islam and never left there path .. They killed Imam Hasan, they killed Imam Hussain .. they tried so many Attack on Imam Ali (as) .. every where they tried to destory Islam, and now these Backstabbers from there generation came to praise those Cruels.

 

For sure these are getting lesson in there Mosques to praise Mauwiya every where .. And they will later join ISIS and Al Qaeda and will kill Innocent Muslims ( Follower of True Islam the one which came from Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) )

 

I agree brother, then they come on SC trying to convince us mouawia the cursed whos mother ate the liver of the uncle of the Prophet pbuh/hf is a great man.... sobhan Allah

 

Alirex, I love you when you are angry and I love you when you are behaving like Imam Ali a.s  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I really do get amused with such fairy tales that you bring to this debate.

 

The point I was making in regards to the treaty the Prophet pbuh/hf was not the fact of the numbering of supporters but to root out and prove the dishonesty of the opposition.. The problem you face brother is your lack of will to comprehend what is written to what your reception picks up and that is very disappointing to say the least. I am sure you will agree that the Prophet pbuh/hf did root out and prove the dishonestly of the mekans of the time. 

 

 

What is certain is that there is a consensus among the Islamic sects on the Prophet’s infallibility regarding the reception and conveyance of revelation, but that being the case in his everyday life isn't unquestionably accepted. According to the beliefs of the Sunni school of thought, derived from their authentic resources, Sunnis do not believe in the infallibility of the Prophet regarding issues other than revelation. 

 

The Shia trust that the Prophet pbuh/hf is 100% Infallible and the Sunnis do not, there is not need to fight it brother, the above is from an actual Sunni source.

 

Now regarding Ahlul Bayt a.s, the sunnis believe that this is everyone that the Prophet pbuh/hf was related to and some even go further to say it relates to the whole clan of the Prophet pbuh/hf. 

 

My job here is not to prove you are wrong brother but to clear any misconceptions you have, I know it is hard to let go of your wrong beliefs however I think if you truly opened you heart and embraced the truth then you really be guided.

 

It would be great if you took a moment to look past your nose brother and actually tried to see the truth to the matter. I personally study many hadith from the Sunni brothers and compare to Shia. 

 

I have opened my mind and looked beyond my ignorance, can you do the same?

 

this is exactly what i was talking about in my earlier post.if you want to discuss this issues then why not open a another thread for it ? i`m not saying it to avoid your questions or to disregard them but i`m saying it because it`s taking us away from the topic at hand so we should keep our focus on it because otherwise the point i`m trying to make here by starting this thread will be buried under other discussions because a single question like this can open a large room for discussion.
 
anyway since you have asked this twice i will try my best to present our views on if the Prophets and Messengers ( peace be upon them all ) were infallible. it is the belief of Ahle Sunnah wal jamah that Allah swt protected the Prophets from everything except unintentional minor mistakes but Allah swt did not approve of their mistake rather he pointed out their mistakes as a mercy to them and he forgave them and accepted their repentance.there are some incidents mentioned in the Quran which i don`t even think necessary to show here.
 
regarding who were the Ahle Bayt (May Allah be pleased with them all) then as you said brother, yes there are different opinions among the scholars regarding who are included among the Ahle Bayt and who are not but we know for sure that the household (wives and Progeny) of the Prophet (salallahu alayhi wassalam) are of the Ahle Bayt (ra). the whole ummah agrees about this except those who don`t include the wives of the Prophet (salallahu alayhi Wassalam) among his family i.e Ahle Bayt. now this can be debated for hours but i made my position clear here which i hope you will understand from now onwards.
 
you asked if i can have a open heart and mind look beyond my own ignorance ? well i assure you that Alhamdulilah i have my mind and both of my eyes opened here and i`m not overlooking anything just because it goes against my set of beliefs.
 
lastly as you said you are not here to prove me wrong but clear the misconceptions i have then i agree with you here that nobody can prove anyone else wrong because as long as the person refuses to accept what you say how can you ever prove him/her wrong ??? believe me my only intention by doing all this is that i want people to start thinking for their selves.all i`m asking for is that we should verify the beliefs we hold and the things we believe in with an open heart and mind because when will be resurrected, each of us will stand for himself and will be held accountable for the things we used to do and believe in while we were alive, so my intention is not to prove anyone wrong with this but all i want is that people should verify and analyze their beliefs and views and then accept what they want to accept for people have the right to decide and choose for themselves and i don`t want to force my beliefs down anyone else`s throat and i`m not with the people who intend to that with others, so i hope i made my position clear with this Insha Allah. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is the claim of many that all the 12 Imams were infallible and could not make any mistake ever in their lives. if we accept this belief then how come Hazrat Hassan (ra) gave the Khilafah to Hazrat Muawiya (ra) ??? if it was not a mistake then why don`t Shias accept the Khilafah of Hazrat Muawiya (ra) ? and if it was a mistake then how come anyone could claim the imams were infallible ??? sincere answers and use of respectable language is expected.

 

OK Brother, going back to your earlier OP.

 

You mentioned that Imam Hassan a.s gave the Khilafah to mouawia right? The fact is that mouawia was khalifah before Imam Hassan a.s took over from his father Imam Ali a.s.

 

Now mouawia at the time was killing all the followers of Imam Ali a.s at every corner and also changing the history of hadith at every avenue he could.

 

Now when mouawia has the nation in his grasp, what else can our beloved Imam Hassan a.s do but to show to the people the true nature of mouawia? 

 

After Imam Hassan a.s entered into this agreement, 2 major conditions were set, the first was that mouawai cannot name a successor including his son yazid, the second was that mouawia was to leave the followers of Imam Ali a.s alone and not harm them. There was other conditions of course but these were the 2 major conditions.

 

Our Imam a.s knowing that mouawia will break these terms accepted the proposal of mouawia based on his conditions that mouawia himself accepted.

 

When mouawia broke the agreement, he showed to the Islamic world his word is not worth the paper it is written on, just in the same way his grandfather the prophet pbuh.hf did earlier in time.

 

Now brother Faris88, if your opinion is that the Imam a.s was wrong in his decision then how can you accept this from the Prophet pbuh/hf? So you cannot discriminate brother in this issue and say what you accept for one is wrong for another.

Edited by Journey of Truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother, I never said you were spreading fitnah. I only said that if you didn't read through the article, it would prove that you were not actually trying to seek the answer to the question. Have you read through the link? It seems not, as the questions you are asking again and again are clearly answered there.

 

You do not seem to know much about the Treaty of Hudaybia. You are saying that the Prophet made peace with the Kuffar and it somehow didn't effect the fate of any Muslim. What is the purpose of a treaty like this the, if it does not have any effect? Did not the Treaty of Hudaybia contain a clause which stated that any Muslim who fled from Mecca would be returned into the hands of the Kuffar, while someone fleeing from Medina to Mecca wouldn't be returned? Is this not 'affecting the fate of Muslims'?

 

I quote the following verse (8:61):

 

8_61.png

Sahih International

And if they [the enemy] incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.

 

 

 

Also, I have a question for you:

If Muawiyah is capable of (nauzubillah) being called  (ra) , why did he break the famously-recorded clause of the treaty which stated that he could not name a successor?

 

funny how you are pointing out that i didn`t read through the articles you provided however it seems to me that you are not even reading what i`m saying in posts. 

 

i admit i don`t know every detail about the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and i admit it but if you know about it more than me then you would never us it to justify the surrender of Imam Hassan`s (ra) khilafah and you know why ??? because Allah Almighty testifies in the Quran that the treaty of Hudaybiyyah was a clear victory for the Muslim ummah can`t you see ? we have divine confirmation here from the Lord of the heavens and the earth that the treaty was a VICTORY FOR THE MUSLIMS. do you not believe it was a victory for the muslim ummah ? i`m asking you from the start how can you compare an event which resulted in Great victory for the Muslims while the others resulted in a disaster(according to shia sources of course) ??? how can you compare them both and say both decisions were right while also saying that Muawiya (ra) was nauzubillah not a Muslim ??? 

 

yes the treaty contain that clause but you are not looking at the bigger picture here . do you know that the treaty of hudaybiyyah was considered a victory by the companions before the conquest of Mekkah ???  the treaty of Hudaybiyyah brought down the barriers between the Muslims and non Muslims.this led to intermingling,interactions, and interfaith dialogue which led to large scale entry into islam so much so that more people embraced Islam in two years following the treaty than had during the last 20 years. even though the terms in general were against the Muslims, there are many important benefits it brought to the Muslims and the deen of Islam that it was considered a victory ever since the verse was revealed. 

 

if you agree with what i said above then how could use it to justify the surrender of Khilafah ? let`s not avoid it anymore and just answer this one question i`m asking you here brother. 

 

if the surrender of Khilafah is considered a defeat according to the consensus of Shias then how could you use the treaty of Hudaybiyyah to justify it since the treaty of Hudaybiyyah was a clear victory for the Muslims according to Al Quran Al kareem ???

 

it`s your who say that there was unspeakable oppression during the rule of Muawiya (RA) and that countless pious people died during his rule and a million other things and most importantly it resulted in the assassination of Imam Hassan (RA) then how on earth are you making a comparison between the two incidents above ???

 

by posting that verse you are only proving yourself wrong since according to you Mauwiya (RA) didn`t kept the terms and he didn`t inclined to peace so how can you use this verse in this case ? clearly Imam Hassan (RA) did not knew this was going to happen right ? and if he did then how is it not a Mistake ? who on earth can say it`s not a mistake to handover the khilafah to a person who is not even a Muslim plus he also has ambitions for vengeance for his ancestors ? 

 

i tired to sum things up in this post but if still don`t get what i`m asking you then i guess there`s no point going further than this right.

OK Brother, going back to your earlier OP.

 

You mentioned that Imam Hassan a.s gave the Khilafah to mouawia right? The fact is that mouawia was khalifah before Imam Hassan a.s took over from his father Imam Ali a.s.

 

Now mouawia at the time was killing all the followers of Imam Ali a.s at every corner and also changing the history of hadith at every avenue he could.

 

Now when mouawia has the nation in his grasp, what else can our beloved Imam Hassan a.s do but to show to the people the true nature of mouawia? 

 

After Imam Hassan a.s entered into this agreement, 2 major conditions were set, the first was that mouawai cannot name a successor including his son yazid, the second was that mouawia was to leave the followers of Imam Ali a.s alone and not harm them. There was other conditions of course but these were the 2 major conditions.

 

Our Imam a.s knowing that mouawia will break these terms accepted the proposal of mouawia based on his conditions that mouawia himself accepted.

 

When mouawia broke the agreement, he showed to the Islamic world his word is not worth the paper it is written on, just in the same way his grandfather the prophet pbuh.hf did earlier in time.

 

Now brother Faris88, if your opinion is that the Imam a.s was wrong in his decision then how can you accept this from the Prophet pbuh/hf? So you cannot discriminate brother in this issue and say what you accept for one is wrong for another.

firstly, read the above post i made to Patience101 since you are not going to stop persisting in comparing the two incidents together.

 

and secondly show me one historian who says Muawiya (ra) had all the Islamic lands under his rule before he took bayyah from Imam Hassan (ra) 

 

repeating the same thing over and over in every post will not get us anywhere so first back your claim then we will proceed Insha Allah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

funny how you are pointing out that i didn`t read through the articles you provided however it seems to me that you are not even reading what i`m saying in posts. 

 

i admit i don`t know every detail about the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and i admit it but if you know about it more than me then you would never us it to justify the surrender of Imam Hassan`s (ra) khilafah and you know why ??? because Allah Almighty testifies in the Quran that the treaty of Hudaybiyyah was a clear victory for the Muslim ummah can`t you see ? we have divine confirmation here from the Lord of the heavens and the earth that the treaty was a VICTORY FOR THE MUSLIMS. do you not believe it was a victory for the muslim ummah ? i`m asking you from the start how can you compare an event which resulted in Great victory for the Muslims while the others resulted in a disaster(according to shia sources of course) ??? how can you compare them both and say both decisions were right while also saying that Muawiya (ra) was nauzubillah not a Muslim ??? 

 

yes the treaty contain that clause but you are not looking at the bigger picture here . do you know that the treaty of hudaybiyyah was considered a victory by the companions before the conquest of Mekkah ???  the treaty of Hudaybiyyah brought down the barriers between the Muslims and non Muslims.this led to intermingling,interactions, and interfaith dialogue which led to large scale entry into islam so much so that more people embraced Islam in two years following the treaty than had during the last 20 years. even though the terms in general were against the Muslims, there are many important benefits it brought to the Muslims and the deen of Islam that it was considered a victory ever since the verse was revealed. 

 

if you agree with what i said above then how could use it to justify the surrender of Khilafah ? let`s not avoid it anymore and just answer this one question i`m asking you here brother. 

 

if the surrender of Khilafah is considered a defeat according to the consensus of Shias then how could you use the treaty of Hudaybiyyah to justify it since the treaty of Hudaybiyyah was a clear victory for the Muslims according to Al Quran Al kareem ???

 

it`s your who say that there was unspeakable oppression during the rule of Muawiya (ra) and that countless pious people died during his rule and a million other things and most importantly it resulted in the assassination of Imam Hassan (ra) then how on earth are you making a comparison between the two incidents above ???

 

by posting that verse you are only proving yourself wrong since according to you Mauwiya (ra) didn`t kept the terms and he didn`t inclined to peace so how can you use this verse in this case ? clearly Imam Hassan (ra) did not knew this was going to happen right ? and if he did then how is it not a Mistake ? who on earth can say it`s not a mistake to handover the khilafah to a person who is not even a Muslim plus he also has ambitions for vengeance for his ancestors ? 

 

i tired to sum things up in this post but if still don`t get what i`m asking you then i guess there`s no point going further than this right.

 

A long rant used to avoid my two question to you yet again:

 

*Why did Muawiyah break the treaty?

*Why did the Prophet compromise to such an extent that he gave the Kuffar control not only over those Muslims in Mecca, but also those who escaped to Medina?

 

You avoid my question by calling me to the big picture. So are 'mistakes' permissible if their only in the small picture? Why do you refuse to look at the big picture with Imam Hasan?

 

-Did the treaty not save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Muslims (rather than 72 as with Imam Hussain)?

-Was not Muawiyah exposed as the lying scum he was?

 

Do you really think it would have been better if Imam Hasan fought? Are you saying that preventing a mass civil war between Muslims is a mistake?

 

If this is a mistake, why did the Prophet of Islam endorse it ?

 

According to Abu Bakr: “ I heard the Prophet (pbuh) saying from the pulpit looking at the crowd at a time and at al-Hasan, who was beside him, at another, “ This son of mine is a master and perhaps through him Allah will set things right between two parties of Moslems”

References: Saheeh al-Bokhary, book of Fadha’il al-Sahaba Ch.2 H.3536 p.1280/Siyar A’lam al-Nobala’ Ch.3 p.251/Is’af al-Raghibeen Fi Seerat al-Mostafa p.191/Usd al-Ghaba Ch.2 p.12/Tathkirat al-Khawas p.177/ Al-Isaba Ch.1 p.330/Matalib al-So’ul Fi Manaqib Aal al-Rasool p.227/Al-Sawa’iq al-Mohriqa, S.10 p.137/Al-Mo’jam al-Kabeer Ch.3 H.2590 p.33/Kanz al-Ommal Ch.31 H.570 p.157/Al-Bidaya Wa al-Nihaya Ch.8 p.17/ Tareekh Ibn ِAsakir Ch.13 p.271/Mostadrak al-Saheehayn Ch.3 p.192/Jami’ al-Osool Ch.9 H.6562 p.33/Al-Ithaf Bi-Hob al-Ashraf p.34/Kifayat al-Talib S.97 p.340-353

 

And take a look at this hadith from Sahih Bukhari (http://www.sahih-bukhari.com/Pages/Bukhari_3_49.php):

 

 

 Volume 3, Book 49, Number 867 : Narrated by Al-Hasan Al-Basri

 By Allah, Al-Hasan bin Ali led large battalions like mountains against Muawiya. Amr bin Al-As said (to Muawiya), "I surely see battalions which will not turn back before killing their opponents." Muawiya who was really the best of the two men said to him, "O 'Amr! If these killed those and those killed these, who would be left with me for the jobs of the public, who would be left with me for their women, who would be left with me for their children?" Then Muawiya sent two Quraishi men from the tribe of 'Abd-i-Shams called 'Abdur Rahman bin Sumura and Abdullah bin 'Amir bin Kuraiz to Al-Hasan saying to them, "Go to this man (i.e. Al-Hasan) and negotiate peace with him and talk and appeal to him." So, they went to Al-Hasan and talked and appealed to him to accept peace. Al-Hasan said, "We, the offspring of 'Abdul Muttalib, have got wealth and people have indulged in killing and corruption (and money only will appease them)." They said to Al-Hasan, "Muawiya offers you so and so, and appeals to you and entreats you to accept peace." Al-Hasan said to them, "But who will be responsible for what you have said?" They said, "We will be responsible for it." So, what-ever Al-Hasan asked they said, "We will be responsible for it for you." So, Al-Hasan concluded a peace treaty with Muawiya. Al-Hasan (Al-Basri) said: I heard Abu Bakr saying, "I saw Allah's Apostle on the pulpit and Al-Hasan bin 'Ali was by his side. The Prophet was looking once at the people and once at Al-Hasan bin 'Ali saying, 'This son of mine is a Saiyid (i.e. a noble) and may Allah make peace between two big groups of Muslims through him."

 

 

 

 

 

Will you now go against your most-reputed books? Will you now go against the Messenger of Allah?

 

Please, brother, give up your stubbornness and embrace the truth. Do not persist in lies.

Edited by Patience101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we all know that according to Shia sources Nauzubillah Muawiya was not even a Muslim and this is the view of most of the shia Muslims regarding him,i don`t even have to show here what most of you think about him because i don`t even know of how many things you accuse him.

 

so the Question is why did imam Hassan (ra) handed over the fate of thousand and thousands of Muslims in the hand of a man who nauzubillah was not even a Muslim ???  your comparison between the treaty of Hudaybiyyah and this incident indicates it was a victory for Imam Hassan (ra) but how  was it a victory for him when he let a non Muslim rule over the Muslims and their lands and who eventually killed him according to your sources. how was it a victory for Al Hassan and the Muslims '???

 

now if you will say that Imam Hassan (ra) didn`t hand enough support and resources to fight a war agaisnt him then i ask you How many supporters did Imam Hussain (ra) had when he rose against Yazeed ??? did Imam Hassan had even less followers then Imam Hussain that he had to Allah forbid surrender the Fate of the Muslims in the hands of a non Muslim ???

 

 

could you bring a source of Shia books that we say Muawiya wasn't a Muslim. Even though Muawiya had committed many work against Islam such as holding Friday prayer in Wednesday, drinking wine and so on that was against the Islamic rules, but he tried to show a Islamic ruler of himself.

So Shia believe that he said Shahadatain and he was a Muslim, but his action was against Islam.

Imam Hasan (s.a) wasn't satisfied with his ruling, but because of destiny of Islam and interest of Ummah, he didn't fight him. But in the age of Yazid, he apparently and obviously acted against Islam and its teachings, so Imam Husain forced to fight because he didn't want to hand over the fate of Ummah to the hand of such caliph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the second was that mouawia was to leave the followers of Imam Ali a.s alone and not harm them. There was other conditions of course but these were the 2 major conditions.

 

The conditions of peace between Hasan and Muawiya are described: In the name of Allah , the beneficent, the most Merciful. These are the conditions of peace between Hasan bin Ali bin Abi Talib and Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan. The first condition is that you should follow Quran , Sunnah and the seerah of the righteous Caliphs.(Ali bin Esa Al-Arbili , Kashaful Ghumma vol. 2, p. 45)

Same thing is also present in Ibn `Aqil, al-Nasa’ih al-Kafiya, p. 156.

Similar reports are present in Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 10, p. 115.. Jila ul Ayun, Page 232

now you tell me what does this proves ? because we all know that Al Hassan (ra) lived for about 10 years after the treaty. so if the Muawiyah (ra) broke this clause of the treaty and killed and oppressed many of the shia of Ali (ra) as claimed by the shia historians and muhaddiths then why didn`t Al Hassan (ra) retaliated and marched against him ? because the treaty was nullified right ?  :) 

what happened when the Mekkans broke the treaty of Hudaybiyyah ? do i have to tell you ? 

since you did not understood my privious posts ( or don`t want to understand them) let me make this easy for you brother. tell me did the Prophet (pbuh) handed the rule of his Ummah in the hands of Maaz Allah a Kaffir/Munafiq in order to expose his hypocrisy ??? is that what you are trying to imply by comparing the two incidents ? this is exactly what you are saying by using the hudaybiyyah incident in this case.

 i believe that Imam Hassan (ra) was on 100% haqq when he made that decision and it was a blessing for the distressed Muslim Ummah in those times and the Prophet (pbuh) already told everyone that Allah swt may make peace between two groups of muslims through my grandson Hassan (ra) as reported in a hadith of Bukhari. so there not a shadow of doubt here that all Sunnis believe that Al Hassan (ra) was right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

secondly show me one historian who says Muawiya (ra) had all the Islamic lands under his rule before he took bayyah from Imam Hassan (ra) 

 

repeating the same thing over and over in every post will not get us anywhere so first back your claim then we will proceed Insha Allah.

 

Sorry brother but you have either not studied history and have no clue or are just plain thick ? choose 1 and we will call it a day bro.

 

mouawia the cursed was the khalifa, what does that mean? you answer that and we can also call it a day bro...(let me help you brother, Khalifa means you rule over all Muslim territory) I just thought I will help you because it seems you still need years to reach the level of most people.

 

mouawia whos mother ate the liver of the uncle of the Prophet pbuh/hf changed many laws, he prayed Friday prayers on a Wednesday and this also was one of the conditions of Imam Hassan(as) because Imam Hassan (as) told mouawia that he cannot change the sunnah of his grandfather rasol Allah.

 

Honestly bro, I do not understand why you keep running around in circles, you follow people blindly without research, who keep changing what the Prophet pbuh/hf has made law and if you want there is a list I can write for you that shows what laws YOUR BELOVED Khalifas have changed from the true sunnah of the Prophet pbuh/hf.

 

You must understand this, what the Prophet pbuh/hf made halal remains halal till the end and what he made haram remains haram till the end. A Khalifa cannot come and change and make something the prophet pbuh/hf made halal into haram. (Again a simple example can be given in regards to Umar (2nd Khalifa) when he made Muta haram and that was something the prophet pbuh/hf has made halal) so in essence you are following a different sunnah from the sunnah of the prophet pbuh/hf... What is funny is some of your own scholars have invented a copy cat system of the Muta and called it Nikah Mysr and Nikah Jihad like come on wake up and smell the coffee brother . I think you need a few extra strong pots to start thinking straight.

 

 

 

 

because Allah Almighty testifies in the Quran that the treaty of Hudaybiyyah was a clear victory for the Muslim ummah can`t you see ? we have divine confirmation here from the Lord of the heavens and the earth that the treaty was a VICTORY FOR THE MUSLIMS. do you not believe it was a victory for the muslim ummah ?

 

yes the treaty contain that clause but you are not looking at the bigger picture here . do you know that the treaty of hudaybiyyah was considered a victory by the companions before the conquest of Mekkah ???  the treaty of Hudaybiyyah brought down the barriers between the Muslims and non Muslims.this led to intermingling,interactions, and interfaith dialogue which led to large scale entry into islam so much so that more people embraced Islam in two years following the treaty than had during the last 20 years. even though the terms in general were against the Muslims, there are many important benefits it brought to the Muslims and the deen of Islam that it was considered a victory ever since the verse was revealed. 

 

 

Yes Brother you are correct it was a victory for the Muslims and that is because the Kufar were shown for there dishonestly and there corruption and hatred and there true colors was revealed to the whole Islamic world and that in itself was the victory. Hence that being said, it was this exact victory that Imam Hassan (as) brought the Muslims as he showed the Islamic world what a tyrant mouawia is and how dishonest he was and corrupt. He showed the Ummah the true colors of mouawia and when mouawia broke every condition and rule in the agreement, Imam Hassan (as) was victorious like his Grand Father the Prophet pbuh/hf.

 

You want answers brother? below is your answer.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWSx0bBiNIs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The conditions of peace between Hasan and Muawiya are described: In the name of Allah , the beneficent, the most Merciful. These are the conditions of peace between Hasan bin Ali bin Abi Talib and Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan. The first condition is that you should follow Quran , Sunnah and the seerah of the righteous Caliphs.(Ali bin Esa Al-Arbili , Kashaful Ghumma vol. 2, p. 45)

Same thing is also present in Ibn `Aqil, al-Nasa’ih al-Kafiya, p. 156.

Similar reports are present in Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 10, p. 115.. Jila ul Ayun, Page 232

now you tell me what does this proves ? because we all know that Al Hassan (ra) lived for about 10 years after the treaty. so if the Muawiyah (ra) broke this clause of the treaty and killed and oppressed many of the shia of Ali (ra) as claimed by the shia historians and muhaddiths then why didn`t Al Hassan (ra) retaliated and marched against him ? because the treaty was nullified right ?  :) 

what happened when the Mekkans broke the treaty of Hudaybiyyah ? do i have to tell you ? 

since you did not understood my privious posts ( or don`t want to understand them) let me make this easy for you brother. tell me did the Prophet (pbuh) handed the rule of his Ummah in the hands of Maaz Allah a Kaffir/Munafiq in order to expose his hypocrisy ??? is that what you are trying to imply by comparing the two incidents ? this is exactly what you are saying by using the hudaybiyyah incident in this case.

 i believe that Imam Hassan (ra) was on 100% haqq when he made that decision and it was a blessing for the distressed Muslim Ummah in those times and the Prophet (pbuh) already told everyone that Allah swt may make peace between two groups of muslims through my grandson Hassan (ra) as reported in a hadith of Bukhari. so there not a shadow of doubt here that all Sunnis believe that Al Hassan (ra) was right. 

 

Sobhan Allah Brother wallah sometimes I just want to hang myself from people who are just to blind to see the truth wallahi.

 

The Prophet pbuh/hf whom your beloved khalifis changed alot of his rules told the kufar in mekka that if any Muslim was to leave and come and join me we will send them back to you and if any mekkans that are with me want to go and join you they are free if you accept them. 

 

1 important fact that you seem to not comprehend brother, now I am not sure if you are just plain thick or you chose  not to accept and that is Imam Hassan (as) was not the Khalifa at the time of this agreement, Mouawia was the Khalifa so how can Imam Hassan (as) give something to Mouawia that Mouawia already had? come on bro surly you can at least comprehend that easy explanation ? 

 

Just to add one last thing in this topic before I leave it as I see no point because you only hear your voice.

 

We trust and believe 100% that our Imam Hassan (as) done the right thing because thru this agreement he showed the Islamic world what a tyrant mouawia is.

 

With that I depart from this topic..

 

Salam Brother Faris, May Allah (swt) show you the light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sobhan Allah Brother wallah sometimes I just want to hang myself from people who are just to blind to see the truth wallahi.

 

The Prophet pbuh/hf whom your beloved khalifis changed alot of his rules told the kufar in mekka that if any Muslim was to leave and come and join me we will send them back to you and if any mekkans that are with me want to go and join you they are free if you accept them. 

 

1 important fact that you seem to not comprehend brother, now I am not sure if you are just plain thick or you chose  not to accept and that is Imam Hassan (as) was not the Khalifa at the time of this agreement, Mouawia was the Khalifa so how can Imam Hassan (as) give something to Mouawia that Mouawia already had? come on bro surly you can at least comprehend that easy explanation ? 

 

Just to add one last thing in this topic before I leave it as I see no point because you only hear your voice.

 

We trust and believe 100% that our Imam Hassan (as) done the right thing because thru this agreement he showed the Islamic world what a tyrant mouawia is.

 

With that I depart from this topic..

 

Salam Brother Faris, May Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì show you the light.

so according to you Muawiyah (RA) became Khalifah of all the Muslim lands right after the Martyrdom of Imam Ali (RA) ??? brother this is not true and i can promise you that you will never be able to prove it through the records of any historian or scholar be it Shia or Sunni. 

 

i already mentioned in my previous post that  Hazrat Muawiyah had the support of the people of As Shaam (which was not just Current day syria but also included lebanon, palestine and some other parts of that region). yes he had one of the strongest and very well disciplined and organized  army on that time before he made the peace treaty with Al Hassan (RA) but to say that Imam Hassan (RA) had no supporters and resources to fight a war against Muawiyah (RA) (if he wanted to) is a blatant lie and anyone who knows a little history of that time can tell you that brother.

 

well i also beseech Allah swt to guide me and to guide you on the straight path which is loved by him, Aameen.

 

Walaikum assalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so according to you Muawiyah (ra) became Khalifah of all the Muslim lands right after the Martyrdom of Imam Ali (ra) ??? brother this is not true and i can promise you that you will never be able to prove it through the records of any historian or scholar be it Shia or Sunni. 

 

i already mentioned in my previous post that  Hazrat Muawiyah had the support of the people of As Shaam (which was not just Current day syria but also included lebanon, palestine and some other parts of that region). yes he had one of the strongest and very well disciplined and organized  army on that time before he made the peace treaty with Al Hassan (ra) but to say that Imam Hassan (ra) had no supporters and resources to fight a war against Muawiyah (ra) (if he wanted to) is a blatant lie and anyone who knows a little history of that time can tell you that brother.

 

well i also beseech Allah swt to guide me and to guide you on the straight path which is loved by him, Aameen.

 

Walaikum assalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

 

You do realize that mouawia became khalifa during the time when Imam Ali (as) was alive and he ruled all the Islamic empire except parts of Iraq.  Imam Ali (as) was unseated from his Khilafa by mouawia as he is a master of deception and while Imam Ali (as) was still alive mouawia was made Khalifa however Imam Ali (as) did not give him baya nor did any Imam (as) . There are many who claim to be Muslims but when the time comes there real religion is the dollar and mouawia knew that and used that weakness in stupid people to buy there support. 

 

It is very evident where the truth lies, people must open there eyes and they will see it.

 

I do not intend to argue any further with you because I am just wasting my time. I come to you with facts and you give me arguments that have no meanings. 

 

You believe and we believe and Allah swt will be the Judge.

 

Salam Brother....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that mouawia became khalifa during the time when Imam Ali (as) was alive and he ruled all the Islamic empire except parts of Iraq.  Imam Ali (as) was unseated from his Khilafa by mouawia as he is a master of deception and while Imam Ali (as) was still alive mouawia was made Khalifa however Imam Ali (as) did not give him baya nor did any Imam (as) . There are many who claim to be Muslims but when the time comes there real religion is the dollar and mouawia knew that and used that weakness in stupid people to buy there support. 

 

It is very evident where the truth lies, people must open there eyes and they will see it.

 

I do not intend to argue any further with you because I am just wasting my time. I come to you with facts and you give me arguments that have no meanings. 

 

You believe and we believe and Allah swt will be the Judge.

 

Salam Brother....

do you even realize what you are saying brother ? if Hazrat Muawiyah (RA) was already the khalifah during the lifetime of Imam Ali (RA) then why on earth did he made the peace treaty with Imam Hassan (RA) ??? you call it fact but i don`t think you realize what you are saying here.  :)

 

if he already had most of the Muslim lands under his rule and he had a large army to back him then why would he ever sign the treaty with Imam Hassan (RA) when his armies could easily defeat any rebellion against his rule ? 

 

you see what you just said above ? first you call him a Mastermind and then you say he got himself trapped in a treaty which exposed him in front of the world, while he didn`t even had to sign it because most of the Muslim lands were already under his rule.

 

i don`t know what is so confusing here for you to understand but alright if you call it a waste of time, i hope you will spend your valuable time on something which is worth it.

 

Walaikum assalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...