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

Election of Uthman

Rate this topic


Faruk

Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Faruk said:

I don't doubt hadith sciences. I doubt their methodology which is dogma inspired. They favor persons because of their political and ideological views as well. I don't say all ahaadith are crap. They are certainly about events which really happened but some ahaadith are twisted, neglecting other ahaadith to serve a dogma.

I therefore use a diffirent methodology. A more critical one in the light of history in combination with reason.

Do you think the political games that are played today were not known in the past?

Hadith  I see as an alternate stream of historical data but it is ideologically doctored on both sides so should be treated with caution 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Hadith  I see as an alternate stream of historical data but it is ideologically doctored on both sides so should be treated with caution 

 

There is no book beside the Quran that I consider to be sacred and/or reliable unconditionally.

Edited by Faruk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 5/3/2017 at 5:28 AM, Student_of_Deen said:

There is no need to confirm it as we all agree on the hadith about the two weighty things. The thing is Sunni understanding of this hadith is much different from Shi`a understanding of this hadith. 

We believe the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said this because someone complained to him about Syedina Ali. He wanted his Ummah to treat his family kindly and fulfil their rights and not cause them harm after he is gone. We don`t believe the Prophet (Peace be upon him) meant that after the Ahlul bayt (May Allah be pleased with them all) come after the Holy Qu`ran because that spot is not reserved for people, it`s for the Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace be upon him). 

Really, I was born Sunni.Lifetime Hanafi Madhab.  When I read it in the Turkish Translation, the English translation that is in current use does not correspond with the Ottoman translation version that my Grandparents own.(they were subjects of the last "caliphate") Guess I am going to have to blow out the rust from my brain and sit down and revisit and retranslate this. Better yet, I will consult my dayi. He also changed his path after researching some old Manuscripts in Iraq.Alhamdullilah. Thank you for the imput!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
23 hours ago, Faruk said:

Yes I did? You too or only the rescension?

Not fully, I`m not much interested in reading books of deviants.

 

23 hours ago, Faruk said:

A copy/paste from a non-muslim called Phil Paine telling muslims what it is and what it is not by someone who supports the usurper monarchy of aale Saud is not credible.

I again see only claims but not arguments. And yes he spoke with the terminology of his time and what was going on those days.

He is non-Muslim therefore you won`t consider his review of the Book ? He most certainly dedicated more time learning and researching these individuals than you ever will. 

Everyone who opposes your views/understanding/interpretation etc is by default a sold out and not credibile but if he agrees with your views than he is honest, fair and correct. 

Why do you even bother arguing when you got a mindset like that ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
23 hours ago, Faruk said:

Can you react ontopic instead of repeating one and the same thing again and again which I BTW already answered.

What do you have to say about the view that after Quran following Ahl al-Bayt AND Sunnah is not contradicting but complementing?

Conclusion:

THE AHL AL-BAYT AND THE SUNNAH ARE SYNONYMS I.E. ONE SHOULD FOLLOW THE SUNNAH THROUGH THE AHL AL-BAYT AND THEIR SUPPORTERS. NOT THROUGH THEIR ENEMIES AND THEIRS.
 

How do you know about the Ahle Bayt ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
22 hours ago, Faruk said:

There is no book beside the Quran that I consider to be sacred and/or reliable unconditionally.

Yeah obviously only the Book of Allah is free from errors and mistakes. Imam Shafi (rahimahullah) used to say "Allah has decreed that no book should be perfect except His Book". This is why no other book can ever be free from errors and mistakes. Allah is absolutely perfect that is why his words are absolutely perfect as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
23 hours ago, Faruk said:

We were talking about the Egypt of Qutb and the rulers back then. Not Mubarak.

You claimed that the MB back then were just some trouble makers who wanted to take over.

Take over from who?

Take over from socialist tyrannical dictators. 

 

23 hours ago, Faruk said:

Anyway:

I was talking about Syrian revolution or do you not support that?

I do not support civil war and rebellion but I also do not support mass murdering tyrants installed in power by the French. 

 

23 hours ago, Faruk said:

The MB from Qutb time doesn't support mass protests. Why do you mention it?

 

I was not talking about MB.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
23 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

So take names which Iraqis were bad in your books and which were not 

Don`t ask nonsensical question. I can`t pin point who was good and who was bad. However the words of ibn zybayr and many other Sahabis makes it clear that kufa was very bad. Ibn Zubayr (ra) even held them responsible for the martyrdom of Hussain (ra). 

 

23 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Why are you denying ibn zubayr ruled over them and was a caliph ?

I never heard anyone saying he ruled over both Iraq as well as the hijaz. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎05‎.‎05‎.‎2017 at 11:39 AM, Student_of_Deen said:

 

 

 

If accepting others as Khalifah will make someone misguided and even a kaffir then how can he remain silent ? I think even you can see how illogical all this sounds. 

brother you cant force anyone its probhited in Islam and no matter what you will always believe that abu bakr is caliph no matter how much proof you get u havent given me any reference that Prophet Muhammad Saww said that after me abu bakr is caliph? and i said to you that if Prophet Muhammad Saww said that omar is Prophet after me naozobillah so why was he caliph at second number why not first you guys will always defend wrong people i have seen in history u guys believe in people who has done nothing for Islam only world materialistic people you guys like for you power and money matters only and who was attached to Imam Ali As never got astray but who left him is for sure kafirs and munafiq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Student_of_Deen said:

Who is talking about forcing people ? HE DID NOT LET THE PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT HIS RIGHT AND THE DANGER OF DENYING IT. 

why are u lying brother if he didnt have told anyone so why are Muslims splitted right now its because Shias supported him in his difficult times and we always tell everyone that its was his rights not any other but you cant prove abu bakr caliphate so you are targeting Imam Ali As just to make excuses for abu bakr and companies caliphates which is very strange u guys like yazid we like Prophet grandson Imam Hussain As u guys never mourn for him we do you guys never talk about Ahlulbayt As we do because its important to tell non muslims about family of Prophet Muhammad Saww which u do not do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Shahjee12145 said:

why are u lying brother if he didnt have told anyone so why are Muslims splitted right now its because Shias supported him in his difficult times and we always tell everyone that its was his rights not any other but you cant prove abu bakr caliphate so you are targeting Imam Ali As just to make excuses for abu bakr and companies caliphates which is very strange u guys like yazid we like Prophet grandson Imam Hussain As u guys never mourn for him we do you guys never talk about Ahlulbayt As we do because its important to tell non muslims about family of Prophet Muhammad Saww which u do not do.

If I`m lying then show me in your books JUST ONE INSTANCE where he got out on the streets and told people to follow him and not deny his right to be caliph otherwise they will become Kafirs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

If I`m lying then show me in your books JUST ONE INSTANCE where he got out on the streets and told people to follow him and not deny his right to be caliph otherwise they will become Kafirs. 

who said that we say to sunnis that they are kafirs we dont say such things its you guys who label Shia as kafirs whitout reason even you believe that abu bakr was caliph we dont call you kafir and Imam Ali As never called anyone for kafir you dont know anything about him because your connection with their enemies has let you astray brother you dont know status of Ahlulbayt As you cant dream about how much their status is brother :) they are one of most important figures of Islam.

but you guys say that if someone dont believe in abu bakr omar uthman are kafirs we dont say kafir to you guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
20 minutes ago, Shahjee12145 said:

who said that we say to sunnis that they are kafirs we dont say such things its you guys who label Shia as kafirs whitout reason even you believe that abu bakr was caliph we dont call you kafir and Imam Ali As never called anyone for kafir you dont know anything about him because your connection with their enemies has let you astray brother you dont know status of Ahlulbayt As you cant dream about how much their status is brother :) they are one of most important figures of Islam.

but you guys say that if someone dont believe in abu bakr omar uthman are kafirs we dont say kafir to you guys.

You are unaware of what Shi`a authoritative Books say about those who acknowledge the khilafah of the first 3 caliphs. 

Please stop posting here and learn about Shi`a position properly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i know everything about yours fake hadith brother and our hadith is authentic not like yours i think you should get good proof that abu bakr deserved caliphate but u dont have any proof so you are blaming Imam Ali As that why he didnt do anything and no Shia in world calls sunni kafirs its you people who call Shia sufi and more people kafirs because you guys believe in najd saudi arabian scholars wahabi people only brainwash people and make hatred for another people in their heart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
21 minutes ago, Shahjee12145 said:

i know everything about yours fake hadith brother and our hadith is authentic not like yours i think you should get good proof that abu bakr deserved caliphate but u dont have any proof so you are blaming Imam Ali As that why he didnt do anything and no Shia in world calls sunni kafirs its you people who call Shia sufi and more people kafirs because you guys believe in najd saudi arabian scholars wahabi people only brainwash people and make hatred for another people in their heart

No offense but you are badly Brainwashed.

I don`t see any worth in these kinds of name calling arguments. 

Edited by Student_of_Deen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Don`t ask nonsensical question. I can`t pin point who was good and who was bad. However the words of ibn zybayr and many other Sahabis makes it clear that kufa was very bad. Ibn Zubayr (ra) even held them responsible for the martyrdom of Hussain (ra). 

 

I never heard anyone saying he ruled over both Iraq as well as the hijaz. 

That's the problem sister it's very easy to generalize people but since you don't know the names of the tribal leaders who were in different camps what are you arguing about ? Your argument has no legs to stand on 

Regarding his role in Iraq,  see the biography of musab b zubaur and  Ibrahim b Ashtar 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

That's the problem sister it's very easy to generalize people but since you don't know the names of the tribal leaders who were in different camps what are you arguing about ? Your argument has no legs to stand on 

I did not generalize the people of Iraq. It`s you who took the words of Ibn Zubayr literally. I never said the entire population of Iraq was like the kuffans. I never even said that the entire population of Kufa was treacherous and murderous. So I don`t know how you`re accusing me of generalizing.

 

17 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Regarding his role in Iraq,  see the biography of musab b zubaur and  Ibrahim b Ashtar 

Maybe he had support in Iraq but it doesn`t necessarily means he was the caliph of Iraq. If he was then why did Iraqis not defend Madinah from Syrian army ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Student_of_Deen said:

I did not generalize the people of Iraq. It`s you who took the words of Ibn Zubayr literally. I never said the entire population of Iraq was like the kuffans. I never even said that the entire population of Kufa was treacherous and murderous. So I don`t know how you`re accusing me of generalizing.

 

Maybe he had support in Iraq but it doesn`t necessarily means he was the caliph of Iraq. If he was then why did Iraqis not defend Madinah from Syrian army ? 

Again your evasive answers are not helping your cause.We shouldn't take anything that goes against your argument literally maybe that's the logic you use to extol and glorify the first misguided caliph Mr muawiyah 

Your anti Iraq bias is clear , your blanket condemnation of kufans is too but teachers of many imams of Sunnis lived there too 

Maybe you are a Syrian I understand muawiyah is your national hero and so are the ummayyads 

Lol do you realize how dumb that sounds ? Iraqis already were locked in a life or death struggle with Syrian ummayyads in Iraq.They were already defeated by Hajjaj And before that by ibn ziyad.You need logistics to get an army from kufa  to  medina,  only the ummayyads with their huge treasury had the resources to do so,  the Iraqi uprisings there were local and did not have the financial support to spread beyond a certain region.By same logic why didn't Muawiyah help aisha in Jamal? 

Ibn zubaur defeated Mukhtar in Iraq then ruled directly through his governors and his brother until they were defeated by ummayyads 

That's why all your arguments are so baseless and disjointed this is basic history of second fitna 

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Not fully, I`m not much interested in reading books of deviants.

If you never check what other people have to say you will never know if you or they are deviants. You just stay in your comfort-zone and that's it. While the Prophets used to verify that which others, especially their own people took for granted.

8 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

He is non-Muslim therefore you won`t consider his review of the Book ? He most certainly dedicated more time learning and researching these individuals than you ever will. 

So you don;t want to read a book written by a muslim while you take the judgment and opinion of a non-muslim who read it?

8 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Everyone who opposes your views/understanding/interpretation etc is by default a sold out and not credibile but if he agrees with your views than he is honest, fair and correct. 

Everyone who dares to be critical like the Prophets were and uses his reason, doesn't have a biggot attitude, makes research himself and shows proofs is correct or at least someone I can talk with.

You're methodology, if it's even worth to call it a methodology is based on hearsay and bigotry websites and videos. Not on your own re-search.

8 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Why do you even bother arguing when you got a mindset like that ?

Take a look in the mirror.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

How do you know about the Ahle Bayt ? 

By studying Shi'ism and all the parties that were ofshoots of those who sided with Imam Ali a.s. and his sons. Compare, analyze and do a thorough research. A student of deen is able to do it.

But put the Quran always above all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Yeah obviously only the Book of Allah is free from errors and mistakes. Imam Shafi (rahimahullah) used to say "Allah has decreed that no book should be perfect except His Book". This is why no other book can ever be free from errors and mistakes. Allah is absolutely perfect that is why his words are absolutely perfect as well. 

Allahu Akbar! We do have a common ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Who is talking about forcing people ? HE DID NOT LET THE PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT HIS RIGHT AND THE DANGER OF DENYING IT. 

His right was known by divine appointment and legitimate by reason as well.


1) According to the divine appointment at Ghaddir Khum

2) According to the reasoning of Abu Bakr in the election of Saqifah, Imam Ali a.s. would have become the Caliph too.

The reason Imam Ali a.s. stayed passive was because he a.s. considered the interrests and the peace in the Ummah more important than his own right.

This is a characteristic of true leadership that one-eyed people do not understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
18 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Again your evasive answers are not helping your cause.We shouldn't take anything that goes against your argument literally maybe that's the logic you use to extol and glorify the first misguided caliph Mr muawiyah 

Your anti Iraq bias is clear , your blanket condemnation of kufans is too but teachers of many imams of Sunnis lived there too 

I`m not being evasive and I never made a blanket condemnation on Kufans. Even in Kufa there were plenty of Muslims whom Ahle Sunnah greatly respects like students of Abdullah Ibn Masood (Radhi Allahu Anhu) and their students.

But If you want to accuse me of it anyway then I don`t care man. 

18 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Maybe you are a Syrian I understand muawiyah is your national hero and so are the ummayyads 

No I`m not Syrian or even an Arab. 

18 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Lol do you realize how dumb that sounds ? Iraqis already were locked in a life or death struggle with Syrian ummayyads in Iraq.They were already defeated by Hajjaj And before that by ibn ziyad.You need logistics to get an army from kufa  to  medina,  only the ummayyads with their huge treasury had the resources to do so,  the Iraqi uprisings there were local and did not have the financial support to spread beyond a certain region.By same logic why didn't Muawiyah help aisha in Jamal? 

I`m not saying they could`ve sent a vast organized army. But they could have at least provided some manpower in order to defend the city against Hajjaj because Madinah was low on manpower and vastly outnumbered by the Ummayad forces. 

He could have invaded Kufa while Syedina Ali was in Basra but he didn`t. If he was as evil as you paint him he certainly would`ve done it 

 

18 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Ibn zubaur defeated Mukhtar in Iraq then ruled directly through his governors and his brother until they were defeated by ummayyads 

That's why all your arguments are so baseless and disjointed this is basic history of second fitna 

Okay my mistake, Ibn Zubayr did eshtalish his rule through his governors for a brief period. But what was your original point ? I don`t even remember why we`re talking about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Lol no he's wasn't being nice...muauwiyah plan was to use aisha and talha stupid misadventure into Basra to have Iraqis fight amongst themselves.Thats why ummayyad marwan was in talha army in Jamal and later left to join muawiyah 

 

Secondly at that time muawiyah was still trying to rile  up the population in Syria and a Egypt was under qays b saad at that time so his back was not secure 

Thirdly Ali left qaraza b kaab the conquerer of Rayy in charge of kufa so it was not a vulnerable target  

I'm just saying you are drawing conclusions based on a very narrow interpretation of certain ahadith.i appreciate your knowledge of hadith but please brother put aside your sectarian bias and look at the bigger picture. Shias and Sunnis both hold deeply entrenched ideological views which are not 100% truth and it lies somewhere in between.

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
10 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Lol no he's wasn't being nice...muauwiyah plan was to use aisha and talha stupid misadventure into Basra to have Iraqis fight amongst themselves.Thats why ummayyad marwan was in talha army in Jamal and later left to join muawiyah 

And what was that going to do ? he sent off one of his most his representative to join a battle against the caliph just to get Iraqis fight a battle against one another ? 

What would`ve been a better strategy was to launch an invasion the moment he realised the caliph was marching for Basra. That way they could`ve stopped the Rashidun advance and used it as a base against the Rashidun Capital. 

On one hand you people say he was a mastermind, on the other hand you say he was after small gains at the compromise of his character and integrity in the eyes of people. 

16 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Secondly at that time muawiyah was still trying to rile  up the population in Syria and a Egypt was under qays b saad at that time so his back was not secure 

 

But his back was secured and the population of Syria was riled up 8 months later at the battle of Siffin when the caliph himself marched with a much larger army than he marched with at the battle of Jamal ? 

 

21 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Thirdly Ali left qaraza b kaab the conquerer of Rayy in charge of kufa so it was not a vulnerable target  

Doesn`t matter. He didn`t actually had to invade Kufa in order to secure Basra.

 

27 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

 I'm just saying you are drawing conclusions based on a very narrow interpretation of certain ahadith.i appreciate your knowledge of hadith but please brother put aside your sectarian bias and look at the bigger picture. Shias and Sunnis both hold deeply entrenched ideological views which are not 100% truth and it lies somewhere in between.

Just because you may be using a broader perspective, It doesn`t mean you are right by default. 

Yes I agree we can`t know every historical event 100% accurately as things happened so many centuries ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

×
×
  • Create New...