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

Don't these fadak narrations contradict?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Don't these fadak narrations contradict eachother? Namely the first one shows us Fatima was angry with Abu Bakr for not giving Fadak but the second one shows Imam Ali knew about giving Fadak as sadaqa. The question is either the narration is false or one of them is correct only, or that imam ali at the time didn't know about this, or that he knew but was bein disingenous. I don't get it, can someone explain? 

 

Quote

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Hadith 325

Narrated 'Aisha: (mother of the believers) After the death of Allah 's Apostle Fatima the daughter of Allah's Apostle asked Abu Bakr As-Siddiq to give her, her share of inheritance from what Allah's Apostle had left of the Fai (i.e. booty gained without fighting) which Allah had given him. Abu Bakr said to her, "Allah's Apostle said, 'Our property will not be inherited, whatever we (i.e. prophets) leave is Sadaqa (to be used for charity)." Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Apostle got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Apostle..

Quote

,
Allah's Apostle said, "Our property is not inherited, but whatever we leave is to be given in charity.' and he said it about himself?" They (i.e. 'Uthman and his company) said, "He did say it. "'Umar then turned towards 'Ali and 'Abbas and said, "I beseech you both, by Allah! Do you know that Allah's Apostle said this?" They [Ali and Abbas ] replied in the affirmative. [Sahih Bukhari Book 5 59 Hadith 367 ]

 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Bukhari has a lot of contradictory hadiths.

However Fatimah being angry with Abu Bakr and Umar, along with other stories of their misconduct, appears in countless other books of hadith includink Tareekh Tabari and Sharif al Qarashi, among many more books I don't remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Don't these fadak narrations contradict eachother? Namely the first one shows us Fatima was angry with Abu Bakr for not giving Fadak but the second one shows Imam Ali knew about giving Fadak as sadaqa. The question is either the narration is false or one of them is correct only, or that imam ali at the time didn't know about this, or that he knew but was bein disingenous. I don't get it, can someone explain? 

 

 

To begin with, the hadith which is attributed to Prophet that "Whatever Prophets leave is made charity" is against the Quran. Is not it in Quran that Allah AWJ says that it is not fitting for Muslims that they die while abandoning the share of their inheritors in property. Who is the first Muslim ? Prophet PBUHHP said that I am the first Muslim, so do you think that Prophet would abandon this verse of Quran ? Secondly, if you read in Quran, the Prophets had heirs too. Yahya was heir to Zakariya and Zakariya prayed for him that Allah AWJ give me a successor and heir. Sulemain inherited Dawood and so on so forth. So, Umar was wrong about snatching away Fadak, The reason of this is that Fadak had a written document which prophet PBUHHP gave to syeda Zahra a.s and from that land she used to feed many masakeen and did not spend on her own house that is why she has a mud-brick house and only one Kaneez, Fizza along whom she used to work in home. 

On one hand, Umar tore that written document that is hadith and on second hand considered himself to be more aware of the divine laws than Prophet PBUHHP. He was not successor of Prophet in Knowledge bro, so it was a lie and oppression. And, this issue will be decided before Allah AWJ when Syeda Zahra a.s will summon those who usurped her property. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
23 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

To begin with, the hadith which is attributed to Prophet that "Whatever Prophets leave is made charity" is against the Quran. Is not it in Quran that Allah AWJ says that it is not fitting for Muslims that they die while abandoning the share of their inheritors in property. Who is the first Muslim ? Prophet PBUHHP said that I am the first Muslim, so do you think that Prophet would abandon this verse of Quran ? Secondly, if you read in Quran, the Prophets had heirs too. Yahya was heir to Zakariya and Zakariya prayed for him that Allah AWJ give me a successor and heir. Sulemain inherited Dawood and so on so forth. So, Umar was wrong about snatching away Fadak, The reason of this is that Fadak had a written document which prophet PBUHHP gave to syeda Zahra a.s and from that land she used to feed many masakeen and did not spend on her own house that is why she has a mud-brick house and only one Kaneez, Fizza along whom she used to work in home. 

On one hand, Umar tore that written document that is hadith and on second hand considered himself to be more aware of the divine laws than Prophet PBUHHP. He was not successor of Prophet in Knowledge bro, so it was a lie and oppression. And, this issue will be decided before Allah AWJ when Syeda Zahra a.s will summon those who usurped her property. 

Do you have the ayah for this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Do you have the ayah for this?

[4:33] And to every one We have appointed heirs of what parents and near relatives leave; and as to those with whom your rights hands have ratified agreements, give them their portion; surely Allah is a witness over all things.

The word is every one and it include every human being. There are many other verses if you like, I will post some of them as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
23 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Don't these fadak narrations contradict eachother? Namely the first one shows us Fatima was angry with Abu Bakr for not giving Fadak but the second one shows Imam Ali knew about giving Fadak as sadaqa. The question is either the narration is false or one of them is correct only, or that imam ali at the time didn't know about this, or that he knew but was bein disingenous. I don't get it, can someone explain? 

Where is the contradiction ? There is no contradiction here.

 The only reason you think it`s contradictory because you`re reading them with Shi`a mindset. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
21 hours ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

Bukhari has a lot of contradictory hadiths.

However Fatimah being angry with Abu Bakr and Umar, along with other stories of their misconduct, appears in countless other books of hadith includink Tareekh Tabari and Sharif al Qarashi, among many more books I don't remember.

Oh right Tabari and other history books are more reliable than Books of Hadith right ? 

You purposefully use the version of this hadith which contains the word angry despite the fact that it is doubtful and there are many other versions of this hadith which doesn`t contains the word angry. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Where is the contradiction ? There is no contradiction here.

 The only reason you think it`s contradictory because you`re reading them with Shi`a mindset. 

What evidence do you have for your presupposition on my line of thinking?

Secondly the contradiction is completely clear cut. If Fatima went to ask Abu Bakr for her inheritance, that she deemed rightful. Why didn't Imam Ali stop her then? The second hadith indicates Imam Ali knew about the Sadaqa command by Rasuallah. That can only lead to one of these conclusions, either imam ali had no control over Fatima or that he was lying and being disingenous or that one of these hadiths is a fabrication.

Infact another hadith again contradicts the hadith here in sahih bukhari:

Quote

“When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, ‘O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.’ She answerd, ‘Do you want me to give him permission?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ So she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: ‘By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.’ So he talked to her until she was pleased with him.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi)

Clearly the above tells us that Fatima later on spoke to Abu Bakr and therefore the initial hadith is a fabrication or that this hadith is a fabrication. How do you answer that?

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
20 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

To begin with, the hadith which is attributed to Prophet that "Whatever Prophets leave is made charity" is against the Quran. Is not it in Quran that Allah AWJ says that it is not fitting for Muslims that they die while abandoning the share of their inheritors in property. Who is the first Muslim ? Prophet PBUHHP said that I am the first Muslim, so do you think that Prophet would abandon this verse of Quran ?

Your mistake is that you are applying a general rule for the people on the Prophets as well. The Prophets are sometimes allowed some things which are not allowed for the ordinary people. For example The Prophet (Peace be upon him) was married to more than 4 wives at one time. While the Qu`ran clearly states 

And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four. [Al Qu`ran 4:3] 

20 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

Secondly, if you read in Quran, the Prophets had heirs too. Yahya was heir to Zakariya and Zakariya prayed for him that Allah AWJ give me a successor and heir. Sulemain inherited Dawood and so on so forth. So, Umar was wrong about snatching away Fadak, The reason of this is that Fadak had a written document which prophet PBUHHP gave to syeda Zahra a.s and from that land she used to feed many masakeen and did not spend on her own house that is why she has a mud-brick house and only one Kaneez, Fizza along whom she used to work in home. 

I don`t even remember for how many time I have already told you that no one is denying the Prophets have heirs. 

You never focus on a very important part of the Ayah you always bring up in defence of your beliefs. 

[This is] a mention of the mercy of your Lord to His servant Zechariah. When he called to his Lord a private supplication. He said, “My Lord, indeed my bones have weakened, and my head has filled with white, and never have I been in my supplication to You, my Lord, unhappy. And indeed, I fear the successors after me, and my wife has been barren, so give me from Yourself an heir. Who will inherit me and inherit from the family of Jacob. And make him, my Lord, pleasing [to You].”  {Surah Maryam 19:2-6}

In this verse as well, it is not mentioned which sort of inheritance is meant here. But since it includes the inheritance of the posterity of Yaqub (as) as well, hence we can understand that this can’t mean the inheritance of wealth. Because no one inherits wealth from a whole posterity. Hence it can only refer to knowledge, wisdom and prophethood.`

 

20 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

On one hand, Umar tore that written document that is hadith and on second hand considered himself to be more aware of the divine laws than Prophet PBUHHP. He was not successor of Prophet in Knowledge bro, so it was a lie and oppression. And, this issue will be decided before Allah AWJ when Syeda Zahra a.s will summon those who usurped her property. 

What document ? Please provide your source(s). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
18 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

[4:33] And to every one We have appointed heirs of what parents and near relatives leave; and as to those with whom your rights hands have ratified agreements, give them their portion; surely Allah is a witness over all things.

The word is every one and it include every human being. There are many other verses if you like, I will post some of them as well. 

Are you saying this verse of the Holy Qu`ran is telling us that every single person from the to end will have heirs to inherit his property (if any) ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

26 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Secondly the contradiction is completely clear cut. If Fatima went to ask Abu Bakr for her inheritance, that she deemed rightful. Why didn't Imam Ali stop her then? The second hadith indicates Imam Ali knew about the Sadaqa command by Rasuallah. That can only lead to one of these conclusions, either imam ali had no control over Fatima or that he was lying and being disingenous or that one of these hadiths is a fabrication.

Third conclusion: They didn`t know the Prophet (Peace be upon him) had made it a waqf for the poor but allowed his family to get their share of produce from it. 

 

26 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Infact another hadith again contradicts the hadith here in sahih bukhari:

Clearly the above tells us that Fatima later on spoke to Abu Bakr and therefore the initial hadith is a fabrication or that this hadith is a fabrication. How do you answer that?

Which is why I posted that video above. The last part of this hadith are additions from a narrator in the chain. It`s not from the original narrator Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her). 

There are other versions of this hadith which doesn`t contains the word angry but Shi`as purposefully pick this hadith in order to use it for their propaganda. 

The hadith from Sunan Al Bayhayhaqi is Authentic. 

 

Edited by Student_of_Deen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Third conclusion: They didn`t know the Prophet (Peace be upon him) had made it a waqf for the poor but allowed his family to get their share of produce from it. 

 

Where is the hadith that Prophet made it a waqf for the family ? You meant to say that Syeda Zahra does not know difference between Waqf and what is given as inheritance ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

 

Third conclusion: They didn`t know the Prophet (Peace be upon him) had made it a waqf for the poor but allowed his family to get their share of produce from it. 

 

Which is why I posted that video above. The last part of this hadith are additions from a narrator in the chain. It`s not from the original narrator Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her). 

There are other versions of this hadith which doesn`t contains the word angry but Shi`as purposefully pick this hadith in order to use it for their propaganda. 

The hadith from Sunan Al Bayhayhaqi is Authentic. 

 

You meant to say that Abu Bakar and Umar know more that Fatima Zahra a.s though she was called Sayedtul Nisa-al Alimeen ? Watch your words bro because you are speaking against daughter of Prophet PBUHHP. Is not it a blasphemy ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Your mistake is that you are applying a general rule for the people on the Prophets as well. The Prophets are sometimes allowed some things which are not allowed for the ordinary people. For example The Prophet (Peace be upon him) was married to more than 4 wives at one time. While the Qu`ran clearly states 

 

Show me in the verses that it is written that Prophet's do not leave any one as heirs and Allah forbade them to leave any wealth for their kins ?

Edited by Sindbad05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, you are from the side of people who were weak by characteristics:

1. They were not by birth Muslims and used to worship idols.

2. They doubted Prophet PBUHHP at various stages such as during Sulih-i-Hudaibiya where Umar said that I have never gone through doubt about Prophet more than this day. 

3. Also they abandoned prophet in Battle of Uhud and left his funeral too. 

4. They also shouted before prophet as is written in when Prophet asked them for ink and paper and Umar (Nauzobillah) called Prophet as "Not in senses" Saying "Hizyan".

 

While we are contending on the side of the people:

1. Who were by birth Muslims.

2. Never lied and never left Prophet in any way.

3. Never turned their backs to Prophet and never talked in high voice.

 

You can easily judge if you are among the just just by witnessing their characters bro, it is not that difficult. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
44 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

You purposefully use the version of this hadith which contains the word angry

Yes, only one version :)

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/fadak/fatima-response-toconfiscation.html

We read in Kanz ul Ummal:

“Sayyida Fatima became upset at Abu Bakr and continued assuming that attitude until she died” .

Sunan al Kabeer:

“Fatima became angry at Abu Bakr, and never spoke to Abu Bakr until she died”

Wafa al Wafa:

“Abu Bakr denied Fatima her right and she became angry never speaking to Abu Bakr until she died”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

Where is the hadith that Prophet made it a waqf for the family ? You meant to say that Syeda Zahra does not know difference between Waqf and what is given as inheritance ?

I`m saying they were unaware of the fact that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) had made it a charity for the poor. It can be found in different reports.

 

7 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

You meant to say that Abu Bakar and Umar know more that Fatima Zahra a.s though she was called Sayedtul Nisa-al Alimeen ? Watch your words bro because you are speaking against daughter of Prophet PBUHHP. Is not it a blasphemy ?

What is blasphemous about it ? She was simply unaware of it.

Yes Fatimah Zahra (May Allah be well pleased with her) is leader of Women in Jannah but it doesn`t mean she cannot be unaware of something. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
12 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

Show me in the verses that it is written that Prophet's do not leave any one as heirs and Allah forbade them to leave any wealth for their kins ?

I think you are blind man. I`ve told you so many times that Prophets have heirs but they do not inherit his wealth (if any), Instead they inherit his eternal wealth which is knowledge, guidance and piety. 

9 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

To be honest, you are from the side of people who were weak by characteristics:

1. They were not by birth Muslims and used to worship idols.

2. They doubted Prophet PBUHHP at various stages such as during Sulih-i-Hudaibiya where Umar said that I have never gone through doubt about Prophet more than this day. 

3. Also they abandoned prophet in Battle of Uhud and left his funeral too. 

4. They also shouted before prophet as is written in when Prophet asked them for ink and paper and Umar (Nauzobillah) called Prophet as "Not in senses" Saying "Hizyan".

 

While we are contending on the side of the people:

1. Who were by birth Muslims.

2. Never lied and never left Prophet in any way.

3. Never turned their backs to Prophet and never talked in high voice.

 

You can easily judge if you are among the just just by witnessing their characters bro, it is not that difficult. 

 

 

This just shows your ignorance brother. Every child is born upon the fitrah (natural disposition), therefore every child is born a Muslim. 

I can refute each of your first 4 points but I don`t want to open so many seperate debates as i`m really short on time. 

All i`m gonna say is Abu Bakr and Uthman (May Allah be pleased with them) confirmed they never worshipped Idol even in the days of Jahilliyah. it is up to you whether you believe it or reject it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 minutes ago, Mansur Bakhtiari said:

Yes, only one version :)

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/fadak/fatima-response-toconfiscation.html

We read in Kanz ul Ummal:

“Sayyida Fatima became upset at Abu Bakr and continued assuming that attitude until she died” .

Sunan al Kabeer:

“Fatima became angry at Abu Bakr, and never spoke to Abu Bakr until she died”

Wafa al Wafa:

“Abu Bakr denied Fatima her right and she became angry never speaking to Abu Bakr until she died”.

What I meant is that only one turq contains these wordings. Other narrations from different chains do not. 

Watch the video I posted above then look up the chains of these narrations you quoted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
10 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

The hadith which you put in the name of Ayotullah Khomeini also is dubious even before Ayotullah and he mentioned it that it cannot be said to perfect because of the weakness in narrators. 

Arabic version clearly calls it a Sahih. That is why I posted it with a scan. 

Don`t you realize if that Hadith was unreliable how on earth could Shi`as make a big deal about it for so many centuries ?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Student_of_Deen

Quote

Third conclusion: They didn`t know the Prophet (Peace be upon him) had made it a waqf for the poor but allowed his family to get their share of produce from it. 

Who is the "they" and based on what evidence are you making this claim?

Quote

Which is why I posted that video above. The last part of this hadith are additions from a narrator in the chain. It`s not from the original narrator Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her). 

The benchmark of which scholar are you using to support this claim?

Infact if you look at the narration posted on both of these Sunni sites, you will see where the brackets are:

hadith1.png

hadith2.png

Notice how the brackets have specifically been put for "charity", which is not part of the narration. 

Quote

There are other versions of this hadith which doesn`t contains the word angry but Shi`as purposefully pick this hadith in order to use it for their propaganda. 

Actually this is diverting away from the main issue here, you just accepted that that some narrations from Sahih Bukhari are not exactly "sahih" nor entirely accurate. If you accept that for a specific hadith within sahih bukhari, then you can apply that to every single narration within sahih al-bukhari. 

Secondly, there being other versions of this hadith only indicate that over-reliance on ahadeeth is problematic and can cause problems. The Quran as shown earlier doesn't support the sunni claim in this case. In regards 4:33 numerous ulema from Ahlul sunnah actually support the shia view or things and perspective in regards to this specific ayah. Here it is:

Quote
Al-Jalalayn

To each, man and woman, We have appointed heirs, relations to be given, of that, property, which parents and kinsmen leave, for them, and to those to whom your right hands (aymān, plural of yamīn, meaning ‘oath’ or ‘hand’) were pledged (read ‘āqadat or ‘aqadat), that is, those allies with whom before the coming of Islam you made covenants of mutual assitance and inheritance. So give them, now, their share, their portions of the inheritance, which is a sixth. God is ever Witness over everything, [ever] aware [of it], including your circumstances: this verse was abrogated by His words, But those related by blood are nearer to one another [Q. 8:75 and 33:6].

 

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi

(And unto each We have appointed heirs and near kindred ") [4:33]. Abu "Abd Allah Muhammad ibn "Abd Allah al-Farisi informed us> Muhammad ibn "Abd Allah ibn Hamawayh al-Harawi> "Ali ibn Muhammad al-Khuza"i> Abu"l-Yaman al-Hakam ibn Nafi"> Shu"ayb ibn Abi Hamzah> al-Zuhri> Sa"id ibn al-Musayyab who said: "The verse (And unto each We have appointed heirs) was revealed about those who used to adopt men who were not their natural sons and then make them inherit from them. Allah, exalted is He, revealed about them that something should be apportioned for them in the bequest while the division of estate He specifically allocated for the heirs who were immediate family relatives or close relatives. He denied a share of the estate to those who were adopted and, instead, allowed them to have a portion of the bequest".

 

Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs

(And unto each) He says: to each one of you (We have appointed heirs) so that they inherit (of that which parents and near kindred leave) of property; (and as for those with whom your right hands have made a covenant) your stipulation, (give them their due) give them their stipulation. But this is now abrogated. In the pre-Islamic era, they used to adopt men and youth and allocate for them a portion of their wealth, just as they would do with their own children. Allah abrogated such a practice. However, it is not abrogated if he gives them their portion from a third of his wealth. (Lo! Allah is ever witness over) Allah knows (all things) relating to your works.

http://quranx.com/Tafsirs/4.33

 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

I think you are blind man. I`ve told you so many times that Prophets have heirs but they do not inherit his wealth (if any), Instead they inherit his eternal wealth which is knowledge, guidance and piety. 

This just shows your ignorance brother. Every child is born upon the fitrah (natural disposition), therefore every child is born a Muslim. 

I can refute each of your first 4 points but I don`t want to open so many seperate debates as i`m really short on time. 

All i`m gonna say is Abu Bakr and Uthman (May Allah be pleased with them) confirmed they never worshipped Idol even in the days of Jahilliyah. it is up to you whether you believe it or reject it. 

Bro, every child is born on fitrah but every adult is not a Muslim in the whole world.

Let us begin the debate on every point and Insha-Allah, Allah AWJ helps us to find out the truth. You are welcome bro for discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

What I meant is that only one turq contains these wordings. Other narrations from different chains do not. 

Watch the video I posted above then look up the chains of these narrations you quoted. 

Shall I upload a books about Fadak which you can understand only if you know urdu and there are various narrations which says that Syeda Fatima Zahra a.s went angry and Abu Bakar wept over this. If Abu bakar was not wrong, why did he and umar came to get forgiveness so that syeda Fatima does not go angry against them. 

Edited by Sindbad05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

I think you are blind man. I`ve told you so many times that Prophets have heirs but they do not inherit his wealth (if any), Instead they inherit his eternal wealth which is knowledge, guidance and piety. 

If you say that Prophet's heirs inherit Knowledge and guidance, then why Abu Bakar and Umar refused Fadak, it showed that they do not have regard for their knowledge and guidance because they refused them what Prophet gave them and were insisting on their wrong doings and pretending to be more knowledgeable than them which they were not. I am not blind bro, but you do not want to understand that rather getting angry and calling me blind. I do not mind that at all and I wish that you realize and accept truth and my enduring of your hard words do not turn out useless.

46 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:
55 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

All i`m gonna say is Abu Bakr and Uthman (May Allah be pleased with them) confirmed they never worshipped Idol even in the days of Jahilliyah. it is up to you whether you believe it or reject it. 

 

Read bro about Umar, how did he beat his sister and brother-in-Law for accepting Islam and wanted to kill Prophet PBUHHP before Islam. Why was he so opposed to Islam ? and why he behaved like other infidels ?

About Abu Bakar you guys say that he was first to accept Islam, it means that he was not a Muslim before. 

Edited by Sindbad05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

Show me in the verses that it is written that Prophet's do not leave any one as heirs and Allah forbade them to leave any wealth for their kins ?

This is checkmate,

You cannot get this  reply by sunnis with verse of quran.

Sunni are not able to accept this truth and yet they try to save the false image of the caliph.

wasalam

 

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
51 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

@Student_of_Deen

Who is the "they" and based on what evidence are you making this claim?

The benchmark of which scholar are you using to support this claim?

Infact if you look at the narration posted on both of these Sunni sites, you will see where the brackets are:

hadith1.png

hadith2.png

Notice how the brackets have specifically been put for "charity", which is not part of the narration. 

You can`t see the word Sadaqa right next to the square you made ? wow.

Yes the scholars support this view I told you above.

They (May Allah be pleased with them) are those regarding whom you were drawing conclusions above. I`m claiming that based on the above narrations and some other related narrations. 

 

52 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Actually this is diverting away from the main issue here, you just accepted that that some narrations from Sahih Bukhari are not exactly "sahih" nor entirely accurate. If you accept that for a specific hadith within sahih bukhari, then you can apply that to every single narration within sahih al-bukhari. 

I`m not drawing away from the main issue here. I trying to help you see why there is a issue here in the first place.

Yes the narration is not entirely from the original narrator (i.e. Aisha Radhi Allahu Anha). 

You can doubt a narration only if you have evidence against it. You cannot caste doubt without evidence else we will have to get rid of the entire hadith collections. 

 

56 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Secondly, there being other versions of this hadith only indicate that over-reliance on ahadeeth is problematic and can cause problems. The Quran as shown earlier doesn't support the sunni claim in this case. In regards 4:33 numerous ulema from Ahlul sunnah actually support the shia view or things and perspective in regards to this specific ayah. Here it is:

 

Actually Shi`a books of hadith themselves say that only the Imam can inherit this kind of property from the Prophet (Peace be upon him).

علي بن إبراهيه، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عنير، عن حفص بن البختري، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلاو قال:

الأىفال ما له يوجف عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، أو قوو صالحوا، أو قوو أعطوا بأيديهه، وكل أرض خربة

وبطون الأودية فهو لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وهو للاماو من بعده يضعه حيث يشاء

Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) said:”Al-Anfal is such property for the acquisition of which no camels or horses are use and no armed expeditions are undertaken. It is the property that may come as a result of negotiated settlement or certain people would give with their own hands, may come from a barren land or from inside the valleys. Such properties belong to the Messenger of Allah and it will belong to the Imam(leader) after the the Messenger of Allah. The Imam(leader) will spend them as he may consider proper.

(Al Kafi, Chapter The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums, page 186).[Majlisi in Mirat al Uqul vol 6, page 255 graded it as Hasan(good)]

Esteemed Shia scholar Al-Kulayni (author of Al-Kafi) who is considered Thiqatul Islam by Shias, said:

وأما الانفال فليس هذه سبيلها كان للرسول عليه السلام خاصة وكانت فدك لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله خاصة، لانه صلى الله عليه وآله فتحها وأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام، لم يكن معهما أحد فزال عنها اسم الفئ ولزمها اسم الانفال وكذلك الآجام(2) والمعادن والبحار والمفاوز هي للامام خاصة

The case of al-Anfal is different. It belongs to the Messenger only. Of such properties was Fadak that belonged to the Messenger of Allah only. It is because he and Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s.) conquered it and there no one else took part. The name al-Fay’ therefore does not apply to it. Al-Anfal applies to it. Similar to al-Anfal are such properties as the marshes, mines, oceans and the wilderness. They all belong to Imam(leader) exclusively.(Al-Kafi, Chapter 130, The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
16 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

This is checkmate,

You cannot get this  reply by sunnis with verse of quran.

Sunni are not able to accept this truth and yet they try to save the false image of the caliph.

wasalam

This checkmate only for a person with biased views. Even your own books speak against this view. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

Bro, every child is born on fitrah but every adult is not a Muslim in the whole world.

Yes I know, I only said that because you first statement in the previous post was against it. 

You said they were not born Muslims. 

1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

Shall I upload a books about Fadak which you can understand only if you know urdu and there are various narrations which says that Syeda Fatima Zahra a.s went angry and Abu Bakar wept over this. If Abu bakar was not wrong, why did he and umar came to get forgiveness so that syeda Fatima does not go angry against them. 

I have seen the arguments and evidence presented in favor of this claim. 

Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him) did not came to ask for forgiveness as far as I know. Yes he did say that I will not leave this door as long as the Daughter of the Prophet (Peace be upon them both) is displeased with me. 

 

36 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

If you say that Prophet's heirs inherit Knowledge and guidance, then why Abu Bakar and Umar refused Fadak, it showed that they do not have regard for their knowledge and guidance because they refused them what Prophet gave them and were insisting on their wrong doings and pretending to be more knowledgeable than them which they were not. I am not blind bro, but you do not want to understand that rather getting angry and calling me blind. I do not mind that at all and I wish that you realize and accept truth and my enduring of your hard words do not turn out useless.

I`m not getting angry at you but i`m definitely getting frustrated of repeating the same thing. No matter how many times I tell the dispute is not whether the Prophets have inheritor or not. The dispute whether their inherits inherit their wealth and property or not ? But you keep saying if the Prophets didn`t had inheritors then why this why that etc. 

Brother according to your books the land of Fadak should go to the successor of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) because it`s not regular property which he bought or built. It was part of his share from the spoils which produce he entrusted to the needy and his family (i.e the Ahlul bayt). Even Syedina Ali (May Allah be pleased with him) didn`t change this when he became the caliph. 

 

45 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

Read bro about Umar, how did he beat his sister and brother-in-Law for accepting Islam and wanted to kill Prophet PBUHHP before Islam. Why was he so opposed to Islam ? and why he behaved like other infidels ?

Because he was a relative of Abu Jahl who used to brainwash him and promise him to make him rich if he managed to Assassinate the Prophet (Peace be upon him)

Yes he was a bad person before Allah guided him to Islam. His story is proof that radical change of even this magnitude is possible. 

 

48 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

About Abu Bakar you guys say that he was first to accept Islam, it means that he was not a Muslim before. 

He may not be upon Islam before but he was not an idolater either. 

Uthman (May Allah be pleased with him) was also never worshipped idols during the days of Jahilliyah. In fact he never even drank alcohol or fornicated despite being so rich. 

People who opposed him disagreed with his policies but they did not point fingers at his character. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him) did not came to ask for forgiveness as far as I know. Yes he did say that I will not leave this door as long as the Daughter of the Prophet (Peace be upon them both) is displeased with me.

This thing proves that Displeasure of Syeda Zahra was just and Abu Bakar came to remove her grievances, otherwise, why would one care if one is displeased unjustly ? A right person does not care about displeasure of Wrong ones which is written in Quran that even if infidels be displeased, the decree of Allah AWJ take effect.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Student_of_Deen

Quote

You can`t see the word Sadaqa right next to the square you made ? wow.

Yes the scholars support this view I told you above.

They (May Allah be pleased with them) are those regarding whom you were drawing conclusions above. I`m claiming that based on the above narrations and some other related narrations. 

You completely forget what you stated before...And I quote from you:

Quote

Which is why I posted that video above. The last part of this hadith are additions from a narrator in the chain. It`s not from the original narrator Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her). 

You stated yourself the last part of the hadith is an addition and yet neither of those sunni sites put the last bit in brackets. 

I'm going to ask again, which scholars support your view? Name one and give us a reference. 

 

Quote

I`m not drawing away from the main issue here. I trying to help you see why there is a issue here in the first place.

Yes the narration is not entirely from the original narrator (i.e. Aisha Radhi Allahu Anha). 

You can doubt a narration only if you have evidence against it. You cannot caste doubt without evidence else we will have to get rid of the entire hadith collections. 

You still haven't provided evidence for this claim. Which scholar states "the narration is not entirely from the original narrator"? 

 

Quote

Actually Shi`a books of hadith themselves say that only the Imam can inherit this kind of property from the Prophet (Peace be upon him).

علي بن إبراهيه، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عنير، عن حفص بن البختري، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلاو قال:

الأىفال ما له يوجف عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، أو قوو صالحوا، أو قوو أعطوا بأيديهه، وكل أرض خربة

وبطون الأودية فهو لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وهو للاماو من بعده يضعه حيث يشاء

Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) said:”Al-Anfal is such property for the acquisition of which no camels or horses are use and no armed expeditions are undertaken. It is the property that may come as a result of negotiated settlement or certain people would give with their own hands, may come from a barren land or from inside the valleys. Such properties belong to the Messenger of Allah and it will belong to the Imam(leader) after the the Messenger of Allah. The Imam(leader) will spend them as he may consider proper.

(Al Kafi, Chapter The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums, page 186).[Majlisi in Mirat al Uqul vol 6, page 255 graded it as Hasan(good)]

 

Firstly this narration isn't in the context of the ayah we are talking about, we are talking about surah an-nisa ayah 33. This specific narration is in regards to Surah Al-Anfal, which is in the context of the Battle of Badr. 

Quote

Name

The Surah takes its name Al-Anfal (The Bounties) from the first verse.

The Period of Revelation

It was revealed in 2 A. H. after the Battle of Badr, the first battle between Islam and kufr. As it contains a detailed and comprehensive review of the Battle, it appears that most probably it was revealed at one and the same time. But it is also possible that some of the verses concerning the problems arising as a result of this Battle might have been revealed later and incorporated at the proper places to make it a continuous whole. At any rate, in the whole Surah there is nothing that might show that it is a collection of a couple of discourses, that have been patched up together.

-Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi - Tafhim al-Qur'an - The Meaning of the Qur'an

Quote

Al-Bukhari recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, "Al-Anfal are the spoils of war.'' Al-Bukhari also recorded that Sa`id bin Jubayr said, "I said to Ibn `Abbas, `Surat Al-Anfal' He said, `It was revealed concerning (the battle of) Badr.''' `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported, as Al-Bukhari recorded from Ibn `Abbas without a chain of narration, that Ibn `Abbas said, "Al-Anfal are the spoils of war; they were for the Messenger of Allah , and none had a share in them.'' Similar was said by Mujahid, `Ikrimah, `Ata', Ad-Dahhak, Qatadah, `Ata' Al-Khurasani, Muqatil bin Hayyan, `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam and several others. It was also said that the Nafl (singular for Anfal) refers to the portion of the spoils of war that the commander gives to some of the fighters after dividing the bulk of the spoils. It was also said that Anfal refers to the Khumus; one-fifth of the captured goods after four-fifths are divided ﴿between the fighters﴾. It was also said that the Anfal refers to the Fay', the possessions taken from the disbelievers without fighting, and the animals, servants or whatever other possessions escape from the disbelievers to Muslims.

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1574&Itemid=63

Therefore you have just completely strawmaned the position of the imams and the ithna ashari as a whole. This is because the narration is mentioning the inheritence of war booty and to whom war booty should be allocated to, which is the imams. However this narration doesn't prove the position of ahle sunnah, because by default if you accept this hadith; then you accept that imam ali should of had fadak to begin with. 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

I`m not getting angry at you but i`m definitely getting frustrated of repeating the same thing. No matter how many times I tell the dispute is not whether the Prophets have inheritor or not. The dispute whether their inherits inherit their wealth and property or not ? But you keep saying if the Prophets didn`t had inheritors then why this why that etc. 

 

And I provided you three verses: One verse which says that Everybody should give away inheritance to his inheritors, Second, which says Suleiman inherited Daud and Yahya inherited Zakariya, And third verse which says that Khums is for nearest of relatives, orphans and needy. No where in any hadith it was written that Prophet made Waqf his property to his children. And do you know what is meant by Waqf ?

Waqf is given for entire life of the inheritors, if one says that I make my children trustee of the Waqf in the stipulation, it has to be remain in hands of deceased's inheritor till every one of them dies and no generation is left. If Prophet PBUHHP would have said such hadith, he pbuhhp would not have given Fadak to Syeda Zahra a.s.

So, what you repeat every time, is against you and everything is proved false. 

40 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Even Syedina Ali (May Allah be pleased with him) didn`t change this when he became the caliph. 

Whatever Imam Ali a.s got as Khums was his right granted by Allah AWJ because Sadqa is haram on Ahlebait a.s and Imam Ali a.s used that khums which came to him on needy descendants and other needy people. Khums is for Ahlebait and Imams and they spent them either on destitute descendants of Prophet or on other nation outside the children of Prophet PBUHHP and for the purpose of education. 

Prophet PBUHHP gave a portion of Khums to poors and needy and another to his daughter which Abu Bakar snatched away and there was no reason for him put a claim and teach syeda Zahra what Islam says. She knew Islam more than Abu Bakar and Umar do, otherwise, they would not have been dependent on the knowledge of her husband and children for which Umar said "If Ali were not alive, umar would have died" and Abu Huraira said: "I have not seen anyone more knowledgeable than Imam Jafar al Sadiq a.s".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Because he was a relative of Abu Jahl who used to brainwash him and promise him to make him rich if he managed to Assassinate the Prophet (Peace be upon him)

Yes he was a bad person before Allah guided him to Islam. His story is proof that radical change of even this magnitude is possible.

So, you mean that he was such a weak person who came into the talks of others and Abu Jahl could brainwash him, Why did you then think that he was right choice for Caliphate who could do any wrong by anyone who blow wrongs in his ears ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Student_of_Deen said:

Uthman (May Allah be pleased with him) was also never worshipped idols during the days of Jahilliyah. In fact he never even drank alcohol or fornicated despite being so rich. 

 

For this, I would request you to go through google and read about many indecencies which are attributed to Umar after accepting Islam. 

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...