Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

My intention was just to share this document, not to discus each and everything inside. This document is itself a summary from all historical works.

I think, summary of the book in its conclusion.

Quote

CONCLUSION

-

Firstly, the Prophet (saw) passed away unexpectedly without having

appointed a successor for the position of Caliphate. We learn this through

numerous statements, some are clear and explicit while others just hint

towards this. Therefore, it is unanimously agreed upon in all history books

through many authentic and weak traditions that no leader was chosen for

this nation by name. As for `Ali bin abi Talib’s alleged appointment at

“Ghadir Khum”, we find no mention of it by `Ali or anyone else which clearly

implies that it was not understood in the context some of `Ali’s later Shia

believed.

-

Secondly, the Muhajirin were able to persuade the Ansar to drop their

demand for authority and Abu Bakr was selected as leader on the spot by

agreement of the vast majority who were present except Sa`d and Hubab.

Abu Bakr’s pledge was sudden and unplanned, it happened in a state of

emergency and could have led to dangerous consequences thus `Umar

warned people to not take that path ever again. Abu Bakr would receive a

public pledge from everybody on the next day with only select individuals

refusing such as Khalid but nobody was forced.

-

Thirdly, the stories about the house of `Ali being burned and the killing of

his wife and child are baseless sectarian fabrications and none of that took place. `Ali and Zubayr gave their pledge on Thursday but it was very late and caused certain folks to think that `Ali did not approve and accept so they began chanting his name. `Ali did not pay attention to those who

encouraged his Caliphate nor did he participate much in political life since

the event of inheritance until the death of his wife. After six months, `Ali felt

it was important to clear the air and speak honestly about what he thought

and why Banu Hashim were upset. Abu Bakr showed good will and

apologized then accepted `Ali’s apology. `Ali insisted on renewing his

allegiance to Abu Bakr in front of everybody to prevent further rumours

from spreading.

-

Fourthly, tribal affiliations affected the process in a way that tribes

competed for the position as they knew much benefit would befall their

tribesmen and families if they succeeded. People boasted about their

virtues, merits, lineage and accomplishments in Islam to claim the right of

successorship. The dispute regarding superiority with the Ansar offended

some of the leaders of Quraysh who later embraced Islam and this led to

much tension in the city. The most pious of people were those least affected by any tribal extremism which shows the great influence Islam had over their lives since they embraced it.

-

Fifthly, it should be clear to all how great are the teachings of Islam and

how loyal were the Companions of Muhammad (saw) for had it not been for

the light of Islam, these Arabs would have surely fought for honor and

power just like they did in times of ignorance. It took true divine

intervention to transform those simple desert Arabs into guided folks who

act to please the Lord Almighty even if it conflicts with their past ideologies.

The past Arabs would have never accepted to select a weak man from a

weak tribe such as Abu Bakr to rule over them but Islam has made this

possible. With the power now in the hands of righteous leaders and

enlightened individuals, the Arabs flourished and accomplished great feats

by God’s blessing.

-

Sixthly, history reveals the superiority of certain individuals, the best of

whom are Abu Bakr and `Umar. These two elders proved their detachment

from the materialistic world and their pure understanding of Islam. They did

not seek authority nor did they gather wealth, instead they deprived their

own families and never allowed those of blood relation to rule even though

they both were more than capable with the power, respect and love they

obtained throughout their lives. They had the best of teachers

and followed the best example without faltering thus setting a high standard for all those to come after them. We found it very hard to argue that anybody could reach the high status of these two selfless and pious elders after browsing the history books.

-

The seventh benefit we acquire, is that the Islamic sources contain vast

amounts of information and a large amount of detail can be collected by

diving into the hearts of the large books. The information recorded by all of

these historians may vary in minor details and the different versions will

have their differences but the overall flow of events is similar and the

outcomes are unanimous. The story we recorded above is a useful

summary, it merges most of the details into one text and the result would

be as if the reader went back to the original resources listed at the top and

went through them one by one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very weak arguments @Fahad Sani, I'm not sure how you can believe it. I will prove to you the imamat of Ali tomorrow and what happened after the Prophets death.

 

EDIT:

My intention was just to share this document, not to discus each and everything inside.

Never mind than.

Edited by Hassan Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

:bismillah:

:salam:
 

Details and truth about such historical event is mentioned in THIS DOCUMENT with all references.

 

We know the truth, Prophet PBUHHP said on his death bed to all his companions: "March under the banner of Usama bin Zayd for the war except Ali bin Abu Talib, and whoever does not go with Usama bin Ziyad, Curse of Allah will be upon him". Verified both from Sunni and Shia sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

We know the truth, Prophet PBUHHP said on his death bed to all his companions: "March under the banner of Usama bin Zayd for the war except Ali bin Abu Talib, and whoever does not go with Usama bin Ziyad, Curse of Allah will be upon him". Verified both from Sunni and Shia sources.

Exactly. 

Abu bakr and umar were not even suppost to be in Madina at the time of the Prophets death. The Prophet ordered them to go with Usama bin Zaid to war but abu bakr and umar refused because they didn't like the fact the Prophet put a 17 year old teenager in charge of them. They violated the Prophets command.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hassan Y said:

Exactly. 

Abu bakr and umar were not even suppost to be in Madina at the time of the Prophets death. The Prophet ordered them to go with Usama bin Zaid to war but abu bakr and umar refused because they didn't like the fact the Prophet put a 17 year old teenager in charge of them. They violated the Prophets command.

Problem was not 17 years old boy but that Ali a.s would have been the Caliph when they would have returned from the war. They already had other plans in their mind. And Prophet PBUHHP was poisoned and was not ill due to health reasons 63 is not a very old age, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Why people can't Just Accept imam ali(as) after prophet(pbuh) as their leader instead of 4th Caliph !!! 

who was like Ali(as) after prophet(pbuh) ? 

Who had more knowledge than him(as) ? 

Who was braver than Ali(as) ? 

Who was more Justice than Ali(as) ? 

 

We dispute about first three but no one dispute about 4th than why not put 4th one at the place of 1st one Place ? 

it's just mind boggling... then they say there is no justice in this world !!! even today if people accept Ali(as) as their leader, the whole chaos in world will be end !!!

 

Edited by Struggling_onn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

by the sunni argument, if anyone should be caliph it should be hazrat Usama (RA), who was literally put in charge of the entire islamic army by the prophet (s) personally, the same Prophet who then cursed anyone who did not go and join Usamas army.

surely this has more significance than abu bakr supposedly leading prayers (even though that never happened according to shia hadith)

Dont worry, I wont hold my breath for any sort of sunni reply.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

Firstly, the Prophet (saw) passed away unexpectedly without having

 

appointed a successor for the position of Caliphate

This is not true.

Firstly, every time the Prophet SAW left the area, he always appointed someone to be in charge of things. This is established in sunni and shia sources.

Secondly, the "farewell sermon", which is in every Muslims books, explicitly mentions the Prophet SAW saying his time is up.

So this sudden death theory, is frankly nonsense. Additionally, to imply the Prophet SAW was caught unaware and didnt appoint a leader is insulting.

Even on this forum, in a corner shop, in a small business, they have deputies and second in charge, are you telling us the Prophet SAW neglected this? Even when he knew his time was coming to an end?

Impossible to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Fahad Sani,

To-date, I have given you the benefit of doubt because I thought you are a genuine guy who is looking to learn and teach. However with each post, it becomes more clear who you really are.

Your primary source of information seems to be either Anti-Majoos videos and now the known anti-shia and overtly salafi site 12ershia.

Here are some facts about them:

  • 12ershia site's purpose is to spread leis and misinformation about the shia.
  • Hani Al-Tarabulsi owns and manages that site. He is the staunchest of salafi you are bound to meet.
  • He refers to shia as kafir, mushrik, dogs, etc and these were directed directly to me when I was visiting his site
Since you are a shia, then according to him you are a kafir, a mushrik and a dog. So I have to question why would you use a site and an author that thinks you are a kafir. Its like someone using a book written by Hitler about Jews to form their opinion of jews. Might be a tad bit biased.

This leads me to believe that you are NOT A shia. In fact, you are a salafi in disguise doing what your people do best - spread fitna and discord among people.
 
You have been exposed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

Why wasnt Imam Ali (as) present at saqifa? 

What i understand now, Imam Ali (a.s.) put more important on preparing the Rasulullah's body for qubr (put in grave) than choosing a leader (khalifah). (This is in contradict to what is my teacher's opinion during my university class).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me clear things to you in points:-

1. Prophet (pbuh) did not nominate his successor (Khalifah)

2. Hence we do not have any verse or hadith in this regard.

3. Abu Bakar was rightly made the caliph.

4. Caliphate has nothing to do with religion.

5. Caliphate is not divine institution.

6. Yet who do not accept first three caliph or have faith in them you are a "fasiq" "deviated" and "misguided"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shiaman14 said:

@Fahad Sani,

To-date, I have given you the benefit of doubt because I thought you are a genuine guy who is looking to learn and teach. However with each post, it becomes more clear who you really are.

Your primary source of information seems to be either Anti-Majoos videos and now the known anti-shia and overtly salafi site 12ershia.

Here are some facts about them:

  • 12ershia site's purpose is to spread leis and misinformation about the shia.
  • Hani Al-Tarabulsi owns and manages that site. He is the staunchest of salafi you are bound to meet.
  • He refers to shia as kafir, mushrik, dogs, etc and these were directed directly to me when I was visiting his site
Since you are a shia, then according to him you are a kafir, a mushrik and a dog. So I have to question why would you use a site and an author that thinks you are a kafir. Its like someone using a book written by Hitler about Jews to form their opinion of jews. Might be a tad bit biased.

This leads me to believe that you are NOT A shia. In fact, you are a salafi in disguise doing what your people do best - spread fitna and discord among people.
 
You have been exposed!

Brother, with regard to shia sunni disputes, every site is either anti shia or anti sunni. But some of them are very academic and do not use terms like kafir, nasibi etc. Moreover, if I or someone like an article etc from a site then it does not mean that I am following or accepting their each and everything. I also get knowledge from shia websites, for e.g THIS and THIS from shiapen.com.

Content and sources are to be checked not the label. I am not salafi, nor deoband, brelvi. I identify myself as shia with manhaj of ahlul sunnah. Accepting goodness from both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fahad Sani said:

Brother, with regard to shia sunni disputes, every site is either anti shia or anti sunni. But some of them are very academic and do not use terms like kafir, nasibi etc. Moreover, if I or someone like an article etc from a site then it does not mean that I am following or accepting their each and everything. I also get knowledge from shia websites, for e.g THIS and THIS from shiapen.com.

Content and sources are to be checked not the label. I am not salafi, nor deoband, brelvi. I identify myself as shia with manhaj of ahlul sunnah. Accepting goodness from both sides.

for whatever reason, your sources are usually from anti-majoos and 12ershia. that tells me exactly who you are.

Hani - who's book you have referenced will call you a kafir with manhaj of ahlul sunnah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2017 at 10:43 AM, Fahad Sani said:

:bismillah:

:salam:
 

Details and truth about such historical event is mentioned in THIS DOCUMENT with all references.

 

The historical evidences have nothing to do with the validity of caliphate which is man made.

Can you please quote us the verse of quran mentioning that caliph can be chosen by the people with shura / consultation?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question for @Fahad Sani - would I be a moron for accepting information about Islam from Pastor Terry Jones (the guy who wanted to hold a quran burning ceremony)?

If yes, then why are you accepting fake information about Shiaism from 12er site and specifically Hani?

I am tagging @Abul Hussain Hassani since he is known spy from that site.

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read the saqifa book, thanks for sharing brother

It was nice to see the mention of ubayy b kaab and Khalid b saeed atleast 

Does it mention any refs from Tareekh Yaqubi ? It's listed as source along with Waqidi but then why do Sunni scholars condemn them when they present evidence that goes against their version of events ?

Also are the views of other Sahaba that according to 12er imami withheld Bayat mentioned by name ? As it appears in non imami sources as well 

It will be nice to see a 12er rebuttal to this and esp to see how their primary sources differ 

 

 

 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panzerwaffe said:

I just read the saqifa book, thanks for sharing brother

It was nice to see the mention of ubayy b kaab and Khalid b saeed atleast 

Does it mention any refs from Tareekh Yaqubi ? It's listed as source along with Waqidi but then why do Sunni scholars condemn them when they present evidence that goes against their version of events ?

Also are the views of other Sahaba that according to 12er imami withheld Bayat mentioned by name ? As it appears in non imami sources as well 

It will be nice to see a 12er rebuttal to this and esp to see how their primary sources differ 

 

 

 

I am guessing you missed the part where I wrote that the site and the writer are known salafi, anti-shia bigots.

Have you relied on Twelver Shia history books?
Twelver Shia books have been transmitted in secretive ways among the
followers of their sect, thus they cannot be viewed as widespread or
popular. Furthermore, Shia in general and especially Twelvers suffer from
lack of resources, their sects have not been able to preserve their books and
even what survives today is mostly of questionable origins according to their
own scholars. Possibly out of all sources we gathered from, the only early
historian who was an Imami and maybe even Twelver, is al-Ya`qubi.
Logically, we chose to rely mainly on the major scholars of Hadith and
historians then utilized what they famously recorded and what became
widespread among people. These major books were relied upon by the top
leaders of all sects and were approved by nation as a whole. Quite a few
early Shia historians were quoted but we do not believe any of them to be
Twelver due to the late development of what is known today as “Twelver”
Shia. Later Imami Shia included in their books stories that are completely
opposed to everything recorded by all Muslims historians (including early
10
Shia historians). The stories they brought are exclusively narrated by
extremist Shia and are unheard of by the top historians at the time or the
scholars of Muslim sects. Therefore, all of these oddities are rejected as
biased sectarian fabrications.

Basically, what Hani the Salafi said is that he didn't take any shia source that he did not agree with.

You might as well as ask Pastor Terry Jones what he thinks of Islam.

Abu Bakr's reasoning for thinking he or Umar were the most suitable for caliphate, "we, the Muhajirin, were the first to embrace Islam whereas everyone else followed behind. We were the Messenger’s (saw) close community and we are of a central lineage among Arabs, there exists no Arabian tribe without ties of kinship to Quraysh."

If this is the criteria, then who embraced Islam before Imam Ali (as) and who was closer to the Prophet than Imam Ali (as)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...