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  
Mohammadi_follower

Abu Bakr And Khalid Ibn Walid Burnt People ?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

In sunni references

i search all sunni references about killing people with fire by abu bakr , Khalid or others. Because some people said that to me ,but i think thats not true.

 

I just said 

 

Read in Tabaqat al-Kubra Vol. 7 Page 278

 

It's a Sunni source.

Edited by al-Ibrahimi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I know is that there is a well-known source about Khalid Ibn Walid wherein he cooked meat using the head of a sahaba as fuel. 

This went even too far for Umar Ibn Khattab but Abu Bakr refused to punish Khalid Ibn Walid because he was too important for the interrests of Abu Bakr's expansion ambitions.
 

He didn't burnt this sahaba alive but he beheaded him first because he wanted to marry the wife of this sahaba.

Edited by Iskandarovich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://valiasr-aj-english.weebly.com/uploads/7/5/6/8/7568784/umars_view_of_khalid.pdf

 

Yet Khalid went there and afflicted them with treachery even after their declaration of acceptance of Islam, killing some of them in cold blood, so much so that Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, who was an eye witness to that incident, said that Khalid had killed them only out of his desire to seek revenge for both of his uncles whom Banu Juthaymah had killed.54

 

In his book Al-Riyad al-Nadira, al-Tabari indicates that Banu Saleem had reneged, whereupon Abu Bakr sent them Khalid ibn al-Waleed who gathered some of their men inside animal sheds then set them to fire. When Umar ibn al-Khattab came to know about this incident, he went to see Abu Bakr and said, “Why do you let a man employ the same method of torture employed by Allah, the Most Exalted One, the Great?” Abu Bakr answered him by saying, “By Allah! I shall not shame a sword which Allah unsheathed against His foes till He Himself shames it,” then he ordered him to leave, whereupon he instantly went out to see Musaylamah.55

 

In his Sahih, al-Bukhari indicates that the Messenger of Allah had said, “Nobody employs the fire for torture except Allah,” and also, “None torments with the fire except the fire's God.”56 And we have already indicated how Abu Bakr used to say before his death, “I wish I never burnt al-Salami!”

 

Moreover, both hated the Prophet's wasi and tried very hard to distance him from public life. Khalid plotted with both Umar and Abu Bakr to assassinate Ali shortly after the death of the Prophet58

 

http://www.al-islam.org/shiah-are-real-ahlul-sunnah-muhammad-al-tijani-al-samawi/imams-and-pillars-ahlul-sunnah-wal-jamaa

 

"Did the the prophet ever kill someone because he refused to pay zakat? Did not the prophet order not to kill anyone who says "There is not God but Allah"? Umar reminds Abu Bakr of this but then approves Abu Bakr's decision on shedding blood. It is clear that, once again, they both disobeyed the haddith of the prophet (s). Even if the zakat is a right to be taken from property, bloodshedding is not the Islamic way to do it. This is called oppression and murder!

 

Since they attacked the house of Fatimah and Ali and the companions who were with them, I dont see what would have kept Abu Bakr and Umar from attacking those who refused to pay the zakat, for they had already done the worse!

 

History testifies that he sent Khalid ibn Waleed to the tribes of Banu Sulaym, to al-Yamama and to Banu Tamim to do the killings! Feel free to look this over in the history books. Again, history testifies that those who refused to pay zakat to Abu Bakr were those who were confused about the legality of Abu Bakr's caliphate."

 

Narrated Abu Huraira: When the Prophet died and Abu Bakr became his successor and some of the Arabs reverted to disbelief, 'Umar said, "O Abu Bakr! How can you fight these people although Allah's Apostle said, 'I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, 'and whoever said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', Allah will save his property and his life from me, unless (he does something for which he receives legal punishment) justly, and his account will be with Allah?' "Abu Bakr said, "By Allah! I will fight whoever differentiates between prayers and Zakat as Zakat is the right to be taken from property (according to Allah's Orders). By Allah! If they refused to pay me even a kid they used to pay to Allah's Apostle, I would fight with them for withholding it." 'Umar said, "By Allah: It was nothing, but I noticed that Allah opened Abu Bakr's chest towards the decision to fight, therefore I realized that his decision was right."
 

Reference:
    • Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, #59, Book: Dealing with Apostates ; Page 1461, #6924 (Arabic version)
    • Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Book 23, #483, Book: al-Zakat ; Page 294, #1399-1400 (Arabic version)

 

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) breathed his last and Abu Bakr was appointed as his successor (Caliph), those amongst the Arabs who wanted to become apostates became apostates. 'Umar b. Khattab said to Abu Bakr: Why would you fight against the people, when the Messenger of Allah declared: I have been directed to fight against people so long as they do not say: There is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was granted full protection of his property and life on my behalf except for a right? His (other) affairs rest with Allah. Upon this Abu Bakr said: By Allah, I would definitely fight against him who severed prayer from Zakat, for it is the obligation upon the rich. By Allah, I would fight against them even to secure the cord (used for hobbling the feet of a camel) which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (as zakat) but now they have withheld it. Umar b. Khattab remarked: By Allah, I found nothing but the fact that Allah had opened the heart of Abu Bakr for (perceiving the justification of) fighting (against those who refused to pay Zakat) and I fully recognized that the (stand of Abu Bakr) was right.
 

Reference:
    • Sahih Muslim, Book 001 (al-Iman), #0029; Page 33, #20-32 (Arabic version)

 

AL-HADI.us


Read in Tabaqat al-Kubra Vol. 7 Page 278

 

We also have in our sources where Imam Ali (as) burnt people.

 

They are sunni fabricationshttp://www.askthesheikh.com/did-imam-ali-a-s-really-put-two-men-on-fire-because-they-claimed-he-was-god/

Edited by Ethics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't Maliki bin Nusayri R.A. the one who once asked the Prophet (pbuh) who to follow after his (pbuh) departure and that the Prophet (pbuh) said that he R.A. should follow Imam Ali a.s.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunni fabrications? O really?

 

 
 
1.) حدثني محمد بن قولويه، قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) يقول و هو يحدث أصحابه بحديث عبد الله بن سبإ و ما ادعى من الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، فقال إنه لما ادعى ذلك فيه استتابه أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فأبى أن يتوب فأحرقه بالنار.
Hishaam bin Salim, who said that he heard it from Imam Aboo `Abd Allaah (AS) when he told that `Abd Allaah bin Saba called (to people) the lordship/divinity of Imaam `Alee (AS). Upon that ‘Alee ordered him to repent, but he refused. Then Ali let him burn in fire."
Source:
·         Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 107, hadeeth # 171

 
2.) حدثني محمد بن قولويه قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى عن علي بن مهزيار عن فضالة بن أيوب الأزدي عن أبان بن عثمان قال سمعت أبا عبد الله (ع) يقول لعن الله عبد الله بن سبإ إنه ادعى الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين (ع) و كان و الله أمير المؤمنين (ع) عبدا لله طائعا الويل لمن كذب علينا و إن قوما يقولون فينا ما لا نقوله في أنفسنا نبرأ إلى الله منهم نبرأ إلى الله منهم.
I heard Aboo `Abd Allaah (AS) saying: 'May Allaah curse `Abd Allaah bin Saba, he claimed a divinity / lordship for Ameer Al-Mu’mineen (AS). By Allaah, Amierul-Mu'mineen (AS) was volunterily the slave of Allah. Woe to him who lie about us, for there are people who say about us what we don't say about ourselves, we disassociate ourselves to Allah from them, we disassociate ourselves to Allah from them'."
Source:
·         Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 107, hadeeth # 172



Here is another SaHeeH hadeeth about Ibn Saba, and him being cursed.
3.)و بهذا الإسناد عن يعقوب بن يزيد عن ابن أبي عمير. و أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى عن أبيه و الحسين بن سعيد عن ابن أبي عمير عن هشام بن سالم عن أبي حمزة الثمالي قال قال علي بن الحسين (ع) لعن الله من كذب علينا إني ذكرت عبد الله بن سبإ فقامت كل شعرة في جسدي لقد ادعى أمرا عظيما ما له لعنه الله كان علي (ع) و الله عبدا لله صالحا أخو رسول الله (ص) ما نال الكرامة من الله إلا بطاعته لله و لرسوله و ما نال رسول الله (ص) الكرامة من الله إلا بطاعته.
'May the curse of Allah be upon those who tell lies about us. I mentioned `Abd Allaah Ibn Saba and each hair in my body stood up, Allah cursed him. Ali was, by Allah, a proper servant of Allah, the brother of the Messenger of Allah . He did not earn the graciousness/honor from Allah except with the obedience to Allah and His Messenger. And (similarly) the Messenger of Allah did not earn the honor from Allah except with his obedience to Allah'."
Source:
·         Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 107, hadeeth # 173

 

 

 

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2010/07/abd-allaah-bin-saba.html

 

Not only are they Shi'a sources, they're Sahih and from a classical source Mr. Ethics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you bring me claims that hadiths are sahih, I dont want a khaber al wahid. Second, bring me an unanimous opinion of our present scholars who give gradings to such hadiths, and a examination of every single narrator in that hadith with their opinion on whether they are or not trust worthy. Im tired of these one sided rijalists, who pick and choose. I will stick to that of the opinion of the sheik from the article I posted. He has more credentials.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you bring me claims that hadiths are sahih, I dont want a khaber al wahid. Second, bring me an unanimous opinion of our present scholars who give gradings to such hadiths, and a examination of every single narrator in that hadith with their opinion on whether they are or not trust worthy. Im tired of these one sided rijalists, who pick and choose. I will stick to that of the opinion of the sheik from the article I posted. He has more credentials.

 

The hadith actually goes through two different chains. 

 

This is another interesting one -

 

 
 
عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ أَتَى قَوْمٌ أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ع فَقَالُوا السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكَ يَا رَبَّنَا فَاسْتَتَابَهُمْ فَلَمْ يَتُوبُوا فَحَفَرَ لَهُمْ حَفِيرَةً وَ أَوْقَدَ فِيهَا نَاراً وَ حَفَرَ حَفِيرَةً أُخْرَى إِلَى جَانِبِهَا وَ أَفْضَى مَا بَيْنَهُمَا فَلَمَّا لَمْ يَتُوبُوا أَلْقَاهُمْ فِي الْحَفِيرَةِ وَ أَوْقَدَ فِي الْحَفِيرَةِ الْأُخْرَى [نَاراً] حَتَّى مَاتُوا
A group came to Ameer Al-Mu’mineen (عليه السلام), and they said: “Assalaamu `Alayka (Peace be upon you), O our Lord (rabbanaa)! So he asked for their repentance, but they did not repent. So he dug a ditch for them and lit a fire in it and dug a ditch to its other side and conveyed between them. So when they did not repent he threw them in the ditch and lit in the other ditch until they died.
Source:
1.     Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafivol. 7, pg. 258-259, hadeeth # 18
Grading:
1.       Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Hasan (Good) 

à Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 23, pg. 401

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2011/01/punishment-for-apostate-in-islam.html

 

The Shaykh, may Allah keep him safe, didn't mention the above narrations did he? I think he only brought up Sunni narrations.

Edited by al-Ibrahimi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was narrated from Anas that :

 

'Ali came to some people of Az-Zutt, who worshipped idols, and burned them. Ibn 'Abbas said: "But the Messenger of Allah [sAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'"

 

أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الصَّمَدِ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامٌ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، أَنَّ عَلِيًّا، أُتِيَ بِنَاسٍ مِنَ الزُّطِّ يَعْبُدُونَ وَثَنًا فَأَحْرَقَهُمْ، قَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ إِنَّمَا قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏"‏ مَنْ بَدَّلَ دِينَهُ فَاقْتُلُوهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

 


 

Why didn't Ali obey the Messenger of Allah? 

Edited by IjazLinorAhmad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am surprised at how Shaykh Mansour can justify his position in claiming that it's an absolute fabrication mainly being from the Sunnis when there is a plethora of evidence on the contrary to what he's asserting especially soundly established Ahadith in our books in addition to those mentioned above affirming it. For example, in this short article by the Aqaed.com centre(supervised by Shaykh Muhammed Al-Sanad and Sayed Al-Sistani), the author is clearly affirming that Imam Aliع burnt a group of Ghulat. The purpose of the article was to respond to the Sunni 'Hadith' where it says(..no one burns with fire except the lord of the fire) and the argument brought forward was to weaken it due to it being Ahad. Moreover, the author further argued that burning is established as a form of punishment in Islam. Furthermore, he mentions how there was a difference between the early Sunni scholars in this issue where some considered it valid like Shafi'i, while others did not. Here is a part of the article roughly translated:

"The Hadith (no one burns with fire except the lord of the fire) is found in Sunni books and not in the books of the Shi'a Imammiya and it is not correct for a Sunni to use it as proof against Shi'as when it is not established in the Shi'a books to begin with. This is especially considering that the ruling of burning a person found guilty of a certain crime is established for the Imammiya and there is no difference among them on this issue, just as it is established for the punishment of a homosexual found guilty of the act(see Jami' Ahadeeth Al-Shi'a, part 3, page 460).

And as for the burning of the group of Ghulat by Amir Al-Mu'imineenع, then this is based on the command of Allah Ta'lah and also because the Islamic Shari'a has established certain limits to avoid the corruption happening from the individual level as well as on the level to the entire society. This is in order to cure and avoid such corruption to occur from its roots so that the human does not go towards such acts and if a person is guilty of such corrupted acts, then the punishment of the Had is established upon them...."

Source: http://www.aqaed.com/faq/945/

Read in Tabaqat al-Kubra Vol. 7 Page 278

 

We also have in our sources where Imam Ali (as) burnt people.

https://ia902704.us.archive.org/28/items/WAQ49583/tisaad07.pdf

I couldn't find it on page 278. Do you know what the edition of the book is with that same reference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you bring me claims that hadiths are sahih, I dont want a khaber al wahid. 

 

 

(bismillah)

 

All major scholars from both schools have take solitary narrations as a ḥujja (established evidence). Besides Ibn Idrīs, and his argument is very weak. I advise you to revise and become more aware of the subject.

 

 

 

 

. Second, bring me an unanimous opinion of our present scholars who give gradings to such hadiths, and a examination of every single narrator in that hadith with their opinion on whether they are or not trust worthy

 

All the narrations above mentioned are Ṣaḥīḥ (Authentic) to al- Al- Khū’ī standards of ḥadīth. What you have difficulty understanding is the evident Tawtheeq of the narrator that does not change even to this date (There is no such thing as "New" evidence). Some new methodologies, such as al-Sanad's methodology have tried to approve weak narrators, and as for the approval of most narrators, they indeed have not changed. I suggest you expose your self to more literature on this subject rather than disprove and reject narrations due to your lack of effort.

   

 

 

 Im tired of these one sided rijalists, who pick and choose.

 

Scholars don't pick and choose. They look at the narrations in a holistic manner and deduce what is most reliable for the satisfaction of the soul's Yaqeen (certainty).

 

 

Wa`aslam

Edited by Jaafar Al-Shibli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay so why is it so hard, to take the opinions of our current scholars on that Hadith and post it with an analysis of EVERY SINGLE NARRATOR? It's like you are trying to evade the question. If you have no knowledge because all you rijalists do is post from Majlisi's then say so. If you claim it is unanimous [burning of peope because of ghulat] then also being evidence. I take back my opinion on khaber al wahid, I was mistaken. But I still stand on my point, that I want to see the opinion of our current scholars on this hadith, with a examination of every single narrator.

Also it is beyond interesting that the whole Quran is about condemning extremists and taking others as lords but not one prophet was ordered to burn them. If burning people is a law of God then surely it would have been with the past prophets. But it is too absurd to go around lighting people up to show an example of someone who takes a person as a lord. This is far from the truth, and you people justify everything just because it is found in Hadith, it's ridiculous. Did Jesus go around burning people? Did Allah order the Meccans to be burned alive? No, just to break the statues in the kabaah. All you have to do is deny to the person that takes you as a lord, that you are not a lord. That breaks their entire basis of faith. If one continues to claim otherwise, then their agenda is something else.

Edited by Ethics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also it is beyond interesting that the whole Quran is about condemning extremists and taking others as lords but not one prophet was ordered to burn them. If burning people is a law of God then surely it would have been with the past prophets. But it is too absurd to go around lighting people up to show an example of someone who takes a person as a lord. This is far from the truth, and you people justify everything just because it is found in Hadith, it's ridiculous. Did Jesus go around burning people? Did Allah order the Meccans to be burned alive? No, just to break the statues in the kabaah. All you have to do is deny to the person that takes you as a lord, that you are not a lord. That breaks their entire basis of faith. If one continues to claim otherwise, then their agenda is something else.

 

Just because it was not mentioned in the Holy Qur'an as a previous or current punishment in the Holy Qur'an that does not mean that it isn't/wasn't, is every single punishment of every previous Prophet and our dear Prophet mentioned literally in the Holy Qur'an? And even if it was not a punishment in the Shariah of previous Prophets, that does not mean it can't be a punishment in the Shariah of our Prophet, Muhammad (pbuh).

Edited by al-Ibrahimi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, one must question why such punishments were not mentioned. There is a whole section dedicated time and time again about worshiping beings and even worshiping Jesus and how it is hell bound. You would think God would bestow upon not only Muhammad but all the Muslims from the get go, on how to deal with such people right? Or that they will be punished with fire? Also your claim that sharia changes is faulty. You are claiming good and evil changes. So what? Worshipping Jesus was not a big deal? And then all of a sudden worshipping imam Ali = burning. What justice is that? Why is God so inconsistent? Why does God change his mind? Is he not sure?

Edited by Ethics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read in Tabaqat al-Kubra Vol. 7 Page 278

 

We also have in our sources where Imam Ali (as) burnt people.

Burning people alive was banned by Muhammad (PBUH). If Ali (as) had burnt people, he would have disobeyed Muhammad PBUH, and he would have not been infallible.

Edited by maes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burning people alive was banned by Muhammad PBUH. If Ali (as) had burnt people, he would have disobeyed Muhammad PBUH, and he would have not been infallible.

 

Show me proof of that in Shi'a sources.

Actually, one must question why such punishments were not mentioned. There is a whole section dedicated time and time again about worshiping beings and even worshiping Jesus and how it is hell bound. You would think God would bestow upon not only Muhammad but all the Muslims from the get go, on how to deal with such people right? Or that they will be punished with fire? Also your claim that sharia changes is faulty. You are claiming good and evil changes. So what? Worshipping Jesus was not a big deal? And then all of a sudden worshipping imam Ali = burning. What justice is that? Why is God so inconsistent? Why does God change his mind? Is he not sure?

 

«عِدَّةٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ خَالِدٍ عَنْ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ عِيسَى عَنْ سَمَاعَةَ بْنِ مِهْرَانَ قَالَ قُلْتُ لِأَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَوْلَ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ فَاصْبِرْ كَما صَبَرَ أُولُوا الْعَزْمِ مِنَ الرُّسُلِ فَقَالَ نُوحٌ وَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ وَ مُوسَى وَ عِيسَى وَ مُحَمَّدٌ ص قُلْتُ كَيْفَ صَارُوا أُولِي الْعَزْمِ قَالَ لِأَنَّ نُوحاً بُعِثَ بِكِتَابٍ وَ شَرِيعَةٍ وَ كُلُّ مَنْ جَاءَ بَعْدَ نُوحٍ أَخَذَ بِكِتَابِ نُوحٍ وَ شَرِيعَتِهِ وَ مِنْهَاجِهِ حَتَّى جَاءَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ ع بِالصُّحُفِ وَ بِعَزِيمَةِ تَرْكِ كِتَابِ نُوحٍ لَا كُفْراً بِهِ فَكُلُّ نَبِيٍّ جَاءَ بَعْدَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ع أَخَذَ بِشَرِيعَةِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَ مِنْهَاجِهِ وَ بِالصُّحُفِ حَتَّى جَاءَ مُوسَى بِالتَّوْرَاةِ وَ شَرِيعَتِهِ وَ مِنْهَاجِهِ وَ بِعَزِيمَةِ تَرْكِ الصُّحُفِ وَ كُلُّ نَبِيٍّ جَاءَ بَعْدَ مُوسَى ع أَخَذَ بِالتَّوْرَاةِ وَ شَرِيعَتِهِ وَ مِنْهَاجِهِ حَتَّى جَاءَ الْمَسِيحُ ع بِالْإِنْجِيلِ وَ بِعَزِيمَةِ تَرْكِ شَرِيعَةِ مُوسَى وَ مِنْهَاجِهِ فَكُلُّ نَبِيٍّ جَاءَ بَعْدَ الْمَسِيحِ أَخَذَ بِشَرِيعَتِهِ وَ مِنْهَاجِهِ حَتَّى جَاءَ مُحَمَّدٌ ص فَجَاءَ بِالْقُرْآنِ وَ بِشَرِيعَتِهِ وَ مِنْهَاجِهِ فَحَلَالُهُ حَلَالٌ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ وَ حَرَامُهُ حَرَامٌ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ فَهَؤُلَاءِ أُولُو الْعَزْمِ مِنَ الرُّسُلِ ع»
From a number of our companion from Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. Khālid from `Uthmān b. `Īsa from Samā`ah b. Mihrān said, I asked Abī `Abd Allāh (عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ) about Allāh (عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ) saying, “Have patience like theUlul al-`Azm had patience” (46:35). And he (عليه السلام) said, “(They are) Nūḥ, Ibrāhīm, Mūsa, `Īsa and Muḥammad (عليهم السلام)” I said, ‘How did they become Ulil al-`Azm? He (عليه السلام) said: ‘Because Nūḥ was sent with a book and a sharī`ah, and whoever came after Nūḥ took Nūḥ’s book, and his (Nūḥ’s) sharī`ah, and hismanhaj (course) until

 

Ibrāhīm (عليه السلام) came with his suḥuf and with determination. He abandoned Nūḥ’s book, but not disbelieving in it, and every prophet that came after Ibrāhīm (عليه السلام) took by the sharī`ah of Ibrāhīm, hismanhaj, and the suḥuf until

 

Mūsa came with the Torah and his sharī`ah, his manhaj, and with determination. He abandoned the suḥuf, and every prophet that came after Mūsa (عليه السلام) took the Torah, and his sharī`ah, and his manhaj until

 

al-Masīḥ (`Īsa) (عليه السلام) came with the Injīl and with determination. He abandoned the sharī`ah of Mūsa, and his manhaj, and every prophet that came after al-Masīḥ took his (`Īsa) (عليه السلام) sharī`ah, and his manhaj until

 

Muḥammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) came with the Qur’ān, with his sharī`ah, his manhaj, so his halāl is halāl until the Day of Judgment, and his harām is harām until the Day of Judgment, and these are the Ulul `Azm from the Messenger”
 

al-Kulaynī, al-Kāfī, vol. 2, pg. 17-18, ḥadīth # 2.

 

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2012/07/ulul-azm.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about that hadith? Can you explain to me your argument? No where in that hadith does it have to do with the argument we are having. Nor does it even mention, laws [especially punishment/shirk] can change, All that hadith is saying is new laws and divine books came, but they never let go of them, every single prophet still holds unto them. It is ridiculous to claim the laws of God become void after a prophet leaves the world. Guidance is guidance, unless you are claiming God tested man with false guidance until He got it right with Muhammad A.S?? That God someone failed himself until He got it right with Muhammad A.S and then halal became halal and so forth? Please.. You are just further proving my point above. I advise you to take a look again at this hadith.

Edited by Ethics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Show me proof of that in Shi'a sources.

No, but could you show me any Sahih hadith that Ali burnt people alive !? I have noticed there is only one hadith and it has no chain of narrators.

I just know that it can be a punishment for sodomy between men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

What about that hadith? Can you explain to me your argument? No where in that hadith does it have to do with the argument we are having. Nor does it even mention, laws [especially punishment/shirk] can change, All that hadith is saying is new laws and divine books came, but they never let go of them, every single prophet still holds unto them. It is ridiculous to claim the laws of God become void after a prophet leaves the world. Guidance is guidance, unless you are claiming God tested man with false guidance until He got it right with Muhammad A.S?? That God someone failed himself until He got it right with Muhammad A.S and then halal became halal and so forth? Please.. You are just further proving my point above. I advise you to take a look again at this hadith.

 

 

So are you claiming we still have to observe the Sabbath like Bani Israel? According to Tafsir al-Qummi in tafsir of the following verse 

 

And [i have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me. (3:50)

 

Jesus (as) was talking about some of the Laws that were upon them like Sabbath, Shuhoom, Tayr.

 

No, but could you show me any Sahih hadith that Ali burnt people alive !? I have noticed there is only one hadith and it has no chain of narrators.

I just know that it can be a punishment for sodomy between men.

 

 
1.) حدثني محمد بن قولويه، قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) يقول و هو يحدث أصحابه بحديث عبد الله بن سبإ و ما ادعى من الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، فقال إنه لما ادعى ذلك فيه استتابه أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فأبى أن يتوب فأحرقه بالنار.
Hishaam bin Salim, who said that he heard it from Imam Aboo `Abd Allaah  (as) when he told that `Abd Allaah bin Saba called (to people) the lordship/divinity of Imaam `Alee  (as). Upon that ‘Alee ordered him to repent, but he refused. Then Ali let him burn in fire."
Source:
·         Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 107, hadeeth # 171
 
Sahih by the way, goes through 2 chains
 
 
 
عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ أَتَى قَوْمٌ أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ع فَقَالُوا السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكَ يَا رَبَّنَا فَاسْتَتَابَهُمْ فَلَمْ يَتُوبُوا فَحَفَرَ لَهُمْ حَفِيرَةً وَ أَوْقَدَ فِيهَا نَاراً وَ حَفَرَ حَفِيرَةً أُخْرَى إِلَى جَانِبِهَا وَ أَفْضَى مَا بَيْنَهُمَا فَلَمَّا لَمْ يَتُوبُوا أَلْقَاهُمْ فِي الْحَفِيرَةِ وَ أَوْقَدَ فِي الْحَفِيرَةِ الْأُخْرَى [نَاراً] حَتَّى مَاتُوا
A group came to Ameer Al-Mu’mineen (عليه السلام), and they said: “Assalaamu `Alayka (Peace be upon you), O our Lord (rabbanaa)! So he asked for their repentance, but they did not repent. So he dug a ditch for them and lit a fire in it and dug a ditch to its other side and conveyed between them. So when they did not repent he threw them in the ditch and lit in the other ditch until they died.
Source:
1.     Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafivol. 7, pg. 258-259, hadeeth # 18
Grading:
1.       Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Hasan (Good) 
à Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 23, pg. 401
 
All of this was mentioned in the first page... all credit to Nader Zaveri.
Edited by al-Ibrahimi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are failing to see the point here. Worshiping a prophet = no punishment, centuries later worshiping an imam = burning with fire. We are not talking about practices, we are talking about punishments and good and evil, morality. Why were they not burned with fire, if it is a divine decree? Surely, worshiping Isa A.S was severe, that to this day people still take him as a lord [over a billion people]. I find it odd, God did not prescribe Isa A.S with the same law. Compared to people today taking the imams as Gods is nothing.

 

QUR'AN: " 'And a verifier of that which is before me of the Torah, and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you:

 

He came as a verifier of the Torah; he verified the Torah which was revealed before him and which he was taught by Allah, as the preceding verse says. In other words, he verified the original Torah which was given to Musa (a.s.). This phrase, therefore, does not show that he verified the Torah which was with the Jews in his time, nor does it imply that the Torah of his days was unaltered. The same applies to the verification of the Torah by our Prophet (s.a.w.).

 

QUR'AN: "and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you:

 

Allah had forbidden them some of the good things, as He says: Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them. .. (4:160). This talk shows that 'Isa (a.s.) had endorsed the laws of the Torah with exception of some tough rules prescribed for them in the Torah, which he abrogated. That is why it is said that the Injil does not contain a new shariah.

The phrase, "and that I may allow you...", is in conjunction with, the phrase, "with a sign from your Lord"; the preposition, li (that) describes the purpose; the sentence therefore means: I have come to you for the purpose of abrogating some of the hard rules imposed on you in the Torah.

 

Tafsir Al-Mizan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

\QUR'AN: " 'And a verifier of that which is before me of the Torah, and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you:

 

He came as a verifier of the Torah; he verified the Torah which was revealed before him and which he was taught by Allah, as the preceding verse says. In other words, he verified the original Torah which was given to Musa (a.s.). This phrase, therefore, does not show that he verified the Torah which was with the Jews in his time, nor does it imply that the Torah of his days was unaltered. The same applies to the verification of the Torah by our Prophet (s.a.w.).

 

QUR'AN: "and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden to you:

 

Allah had forbidden them some of the good things, as He says: Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them. .. (4:160). This talk shows that 'Isa (a.s.) had endorsed the laws of the Torah with exception of some tough rules prescribed for them in the Torah, which he abrogated. That is why it is said that the Injil does not contain a new shariah.

The phrase, "and that I may allow you...", is in conjunction with, the phrase, "with a sign from your Lord"; the preposition, li (that) describes the purpose; the sentence therefore means: I have come to you for the purpose of abrogating some of the hard rules imposed on you in the Torah.

 

Tafsir Al-Mizan

 

No disagreement with any of the texts above, what's your point? That you find this odd that no one was burnt for thousands of years due to worshipping the Prophet(s) and suddenly when people worshipped an Imam this started to happen? How do you burning wasn't a previous punishment? And so God cannot add new Laws?

Edited by al-Ibrahimi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
 

 

So are you claiming we still have to observe the Sabbath like Bani Israel? According to Tafsir al-Qummi in tafsir of the following verse 

 

And [i have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you. And I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, so fear Allah and obey me. (3:50)

 

Jesus (as) was talking about some of the Laws that were upon them like Sabbath, Shuhoom, Tayr.

 

 

 
1.) حدثني محمد بن قولويه، قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) يقول و هو يحدث أصحابه بحديث عبد الله بن سبإ و ما ادعى من الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، فقال إنه لما ادعى ذلك فيه استتابه أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فأبى أن يتوب فأحرقه بالنار.
Hishaam bin Salim, who said that he heard it from Imam Aboo `Abd Allaah  (as) when he told that `Abd Allaah bin Saba called (to people) the lordship/divinity of Imaam `Alee  (as). Upon that ‘Alee ordered him to repent, but he refused. Then Ali let him burn in fire."
Source:
·         Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 107, hadeeth # 171
 
Sahih by the way, goes through 2 chains
 
 
 
عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ أَتَى قَوْمٌ أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ع فَقَالُوا السَّلَامُ عَلَيْكَ يَا رَبَّنَا فَاسْتَتَابَهُمْ فَلَمْ يَتُوبُوا فَحَفَرَ لَهُمْ حَفِيرَةً وَ أَوْقَدَ فِيهَا نَاراً وَ حَفَرَ حَفِيرَةً أُخْرَى إِلَى جَانِبِهَا وَ أَفْضَى مَا بَيْنَهُمَا فَلَمَّا لَمْ يَتُوبُوا أَلْقَاهُمْ فِي الْحَفِيرَةِ وَ أَوْقَدَ فِي الْحَفِيرَةِ الْأُخْرَى [نَاراً] حَتَّى مَاتُوا
A group came to Ameer Al-Mu’mineen (عليه السلام), and they said: “Assalaamu `Alayka (Peace be upon you), O our Lord (rabbanaa)! So he asked for their repentance, but they did not repent. So he dug a ditch for them and lit a fire in it and dug a ditch to its other side and conveyed between them. So when they did not repent he threw them in the ditch and lit in the other ditch until they died.
Source:
1.     Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafivol. 7, pg. 258-259, hadeeth # 18
Grading:
1.       Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Hasan (Good) 

à Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 23, pg. 401

 
All of this was mentioned in the first page... all credit to Nader Zaveri.

 

Ali (as) did not burn them alive, he executed them with gas.

Take a look at this site my dear brother. http://www.al-meshkah.com/maaref_detail.php?id=4166

There is only one Sahih hadith which says Ali (as) burnt Abdullah ibn Saba.

Edited by maes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also another hadith

 

 

 عن أبيه، عن ابن محبوب، عن ابن رئاب، عن مالك بن عطية عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: بينا أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام في ملا من أصحابه إذ أتاه رجل فقال:
يا أمير المؤمنين: إني قد أوقبت على غلام فطهرني، فقال له: يا هذا امض إلى منزلك لعل مرارا هاج بك فلما كان من غد عاد إليه فقال له: يا أمير المؤمنين إني أوقبت على غلام فطهرني فقال له: يا هذا امض إلى منزلك لعل مرارا هاج بك حتى فعل ذلك ثلاثا بعد مرته الأولى فلما كان في الرابعة قال له: يا هذا إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله حكم في مثلك بثلاثة أحكام فاختر أيهن شئت، قال: وما هن يا أمير المؤمنين؟ قال: ضربة بالسيف في عنقك بالغة ما بلغت أو اهداء من جبل مشدود اليدين والرجلين، أو إحراق بالنار فقال:
يا أمير المؤمنين أيهن أشد علي؟ قال: الاحراق بالنار قال: فإني قد اخترتها يا أمير المؤمنين قال: خذ لذلك أهبتك فقال: نعم فقام فصلى ركعتين ثم جلس في تشهده فقال: اللهم إني قد أتيت من الذنب ما قد علمته وإني تخوفت من ذلك فجئت إلى وصي رسولك وابن عم نبيك فسألته أن يطهرني فخيرني بين ثلاثة أصناف من العذاب اللهم فإني قد اخترت أشدها اللهم فإني أسألك أن تجعل ذلك كفارة لذنوبي وأن لا تحرقني بنارك في آخرتي ثم قام وهو باك حتى جلس في الحفرة التي حفرها له أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وهو يرى النار تتأجج حوله قال: فبكى أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وبكى أصحابه جميعا فقال له أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام: قم يا هذا فقد أبكيت ملائكة السماء وملائكة الأرض فإن الله قد تاب عليك فقم ولا تعاودن شيئا مما قد فعلت

SanadAli Bin Ibrahim, from his father, from Ibn Mahboub, from Ibn Raib, from Maalik Bin Atiyya who said the above hadith

Source: Furu’ Al-Kafi, Volume 7, Chapter 22, Hadith #1

Grading: Allaamah Majlisi (rh) said this hadith has a Hasan/Good chain (حسن) [Mira’at Al-Uqool, Volume 23, Page 306]

 

http://purifiedhousehold.com/2014/12/03/from-homosexual-facing-death-to-angels-crying-for-him-the-mercy-of-Allah-swt/

 

(for English translation, hit the link above)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No disagreement with any of the texts above, what's your point? That you find this odd that no one was burnt for thousands of years due to worshipping the Prophet(s) and suddenly when people worshipped an Imam this started to happen? How do you burning wasn't a previous punishment? And so God cannot add new Laws?

 

Whats my point? Your implication of the tafsir is wrong. In Al Mizan, it is explained that in fact the prophet was just verifying the torah, and that the sharia was the same. He says: Wherefore for the iniquity of those who are Jews did We disallow to them the good things which had been made lawful for them. .. (4:160)

I already explained myself, the quran speaks of past prophets and Isa A.S is a major prophet throughout the quran, because the quran is filled with examples of people worshiping other than God. I think that is something you should ask yourself [and prove], as you claim it is something that all of a sudden came during the imams time. Again it wouldnt be something new, because worshiping divinely decreed beings has been going on since God sent them.

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...