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  
Cyrax

Reality of Cursing the Sahaba

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Ramadan Mubarak to all the brothers and sisters here; I hope everyone is having a blessed month, إن شاء الله.

I have, time and time again, thought about posting this topic (among others) on this forum, but I generally tend to reconsider because of how defensive I perceive some brothers on here.  I want this discussion إن شاء الله to be a means to at least attempting to understanding each other.  Please don't take this as attack and please (and I am looking at certain members here :grin:) don't flood my post with cutting-and-pasting.

Having said that, I wanted to point out two things that all of brothers and sisters here that never seem to take into consideration regarding cursing the Sahaba and other mainstream Islamic personalities:

1) Mainstream Muslims will find cursing of any personality, even someone like Abu Lahab (who is cursed by name in the Qur'an) and Abu Jahal, as an ugly expression of religion.  Could you imagine a mainstream Muslim dedicating lectures, Jum'ah khutbahs or other gatherings just to call them "worse than dogs and pigs?"   

2) The Shi'as who practice the most taqiyya regarding this topic are generally people who live in the safest regions when it comes to expressing their opinion towards the Sahaba.  Meaning, you'll find in politically torn regions that most outspoken cursers of the Sahaba, while in areas where a violent response is impossible, you'll find the most "unity" leaning clerics.

I think a lot of the brothers and sisters here need to take into consideration that cursing the Sahaba doesn't really offend most mainstream Muslims, as we have a lot more to deal with those who want to insult the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.  Rather, the overwhelming majority of us just think its is in poor taste and not really the character of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.  All you are doing by cursing these individuals is making you seem fundamentally incompatible with the rest of the Ummah.

As a reminder, I would like to quote the following verse from the Qur'an: 

Quote
And by the Mercy of Allah, you dealt with them gently. And had you been severe and harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about you; so pass over (their faults), and ask (Allah's) Forgiveness for them; and consult them in the affairs. Then when you have taken a decision, put your trust in Allah, certainly, Allah loves those who put their trust (in Him). (3:158)

If you sincerely believe you are following the path of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Ahl al-Bayt عليهم السلام, perhaps you will reply to this thread with mercy rather than with severness and harsh-heartedness إن شاء الله

And once again, Ramadan Mubarak to everyone

والسلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assalaam Alaikum,

the biggest misconception (IN ALL SECTS mind you) is the meaning of and difference between the words "cursing" and "lanaat / laana'h". The actual word for cursing is "sabb" i.e using vulgar / very insulting language to degrade someone. "Lanaat" on the other hand does NOT mean curse (even though in a lot of translations of duas / ayats it says "curse"", this is actually wrong!), Lanaat is in actuality a plea, a dua to Allah SWT to "Remove Your Mercy" from a particular individual. 

"Sabb" / cursing / using foul and vulgar language is looked down upon and should not be done. This is clearly evident especially when Imam Ali A.S rebuked members of his army for cursing Muawiya L.A and his followers during the Battle of Siffin. However telling true facts about someone (as in someone having stolen caliphate, being a coward on the battlefield, stealing and spreading corruption) is not cursing, it's telling the truth about someone and encouraging tabarrah (disassociation from the enemies of Allah SWT and the Ahle Bayt A.S)

"Lanaat" is something found many times in the Quran and hadiths and something practiced by the Prophet S.A.W and generally anyone who reads the Quran. We see this in the event of Mubahilla, the event of people deserting Usama Bin Zayd's army where the Prophet S.A.W openly did Lanaat on the people who refused to join Usama's Army, and ayaats such as Ayat 11:18 "Lanaat of Allah be on the Zalimoon"

So yes Tabarrah (disassociation from the enemies of Allah SWT and the Ahle Bayt A.S) is one of the key components of the religion and the concept of Lanaat has complete justification and recommendation as per the evidences above. Practices of sabb does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kirmani said:

Assalaam Alaikum,

the biggest misconception (IN ALL SECTS mind you) is the meaning of and difference between the words "cursing" and "lanaat / laana'h". The actual word for cursing is "sabb" i.e using vulgar / very insulting language to degrade someone. "Lanaat" on the other hand does NOT mean curse (even though in a lot of translations of duas / ayats it says "curse"", this is actually wrong!), Lanaat is in actuality a plea, a dua to Allah SWT to "Remove Your Mercy" from a particular individual. 

"Sabb" / cursing / using foul and vulgar language is looked down upon and should not be done. This is clearly evident especially when Imam Ali A.S rebuked members of his army for cursing Muawiya L.A and his followers during the Battle of Siffin. However telling true facts about someone (as in someone having stolen caliphate, being a coward on the battlefield, stealing and spreading corruption) is not cursing, it's telling the truth about someone and encouraging tabarrah (disassociation from the enemies of Allah SWT and the Ahle Bayt A.S)

"Lanaat" is something found many times in the Quran and hadiths and something practiced by the Prophet S.A.W and generally anyone who reads the Quran. We see this in the event of Mubahilla, the event of people deserting Usama Bin Zayd's army where the Prophet S.A.W openly did Lanaat on the people who refused to join Usama's Army, and ayaats such as Ayat 11:18 "Lanaat of Allah be on the Zalimoon"

So yes Tabarrah (disassociation from the enemies of Allah SWT and the Ahle Bayt A.S) is one of the key components of the religion and the concept of Lanaat has complete justification and recommendation as per the evidences above. Practices of sabb does not.

وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته

Akhi, بارك الله فيكم, would you consider saying that someone is "worse than dogs and pigs" to be a Sabb or La'nah?

Also, I'm not sure why you would think asking Allah to remove his mercy from a known Muslim to be any better than "sabb?"  Both are equally vulgar in my estimation.

Finally, this post isn't here to discuss why and who Shi'a "disassociate from"; rather, this post is to show how Shi'as who promote these practices are viewed by the rest of the Ummah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WS and Ramadan Kareem to you as well.

To us, la'an and sabb are not expressions of ugliness, rather expressions of bara'ah, and therefore are praised deeds when they are used against people who deserve it in an appropriate time and condition.

Now I don't know the rulings of Sunnis on sending la'an, I heard there is a debate around it whether it can be directed at individuals or only at groups, but whatever the case, would it not be a praised deed in Sunnism to send la'an on a group who deserved it? Like the people of Lut, for example, or Pharoah and his followers.

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

WS and Ramadan Kareem to you as well.

To us, la'an and sabb are not expressions of ugliness, rather expressions of bara'ah, and therefore are praised deeds when they are used against people who deserve it in an appropriate time and condition.

Now I don't know the rulings of Sunnis on sending la'an, I heard there is a debate around it whether it can be directed at individuals or only at groups, but whatever the case, would it not be a praised deed in Sunnism to send la'an on a group who deserved it? Like the people of Lut, for example, or Pharoah and his followers.

Personally, I think if a person went up to give a khutbah and said "Abu Lahab or the Peoplel of Lut is worse than dogs and pigs" and made a religion out of cursing him, that people would turn away from him.  Perhaps such a practice would fly in some third world country, but fundamentally, its an ugly practice that would turn away anyone from any religion; "And had you been severe and harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about you."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Personally, I think if a person went up to give a khutbah and said "Abu Lahab or the Peoplel of Lut is worse than dogs and pigs" and made a religion out of cursing him, that people would turn away from him.  Perhaps such a practice would fly in some third world country, but fundamentally, its an ugly practice that would turn away anyone from any religion; "And had you been severe and harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about you."

There is no religion made out of cursing anyone, it is simply one way of expressing bara'ah. 

One reason why people are against publicising bara'ah is it will turn people away, and this is true even for Sunnism, not just Tashayyu.

If someone was to go to China and start harshly attacking Buddhism and Buddha, that will push people away, but that doesn't mean it is wrong in all circumstances, everyone has their own takleef and should make the appropriate decision based on the conditions surrounding them.

You know very well that the Ayah you brought forth is not giving us an unconditional ruling against severity in religion.

Severity is needed and accepted by both groups in many situations, no less in the issue of Nahi An Al-Munkar (which can be intertwined in many ways with bara'ah btw).

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cyrax Firstly, There are several verses in the Quran where Allah has cursed iblis, Munafiqeen, disbelievers and certain nations like Aad and Thamud. There is also a verse which states that Prophet Dawood and Isa cursed with their tongue the disbelievers among Bani Israel (Maidah: verse 78) 

So I  hope this proves to you that there is nothing wrong per se or new with the act of sending a curse on someone. 

Next is what would the Ummah think if we curse someone from the times of Holy Prophet(saw). I think rather than worrying about what would the Ummah think we should be more concerned about Allah and Ahlebayt(as).How does Allah view the people who oppressed and massacred the Prophet's family? What does Prophet Muhammad (saw) think of the 'sahaba' who took away what was rightfully his daughter's and caused endless distress to her. 

I am not saying one starts cursing these personalities in front of say,sunnis who respect the Ahlebayt (as) and are willing to listen and maybe learn. But with people who are well aware of the wrong doings of those personalities yet defiantly defend them,I think there is no good coming out of sugar coating history.

 

Edited by starlight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

There is no religion made out of cursing anyone, it is simply one way of expressing bara'ah. 

One reason why people are against publicising bara'ah is it will turn people away, and this is true even for Sunnism, not just Tashayyu.

If someone was to go to China and start harshly attacking Buddhism and Buddha, that will push people away, but that doesn't mean it is wrong in all circumstances, everyone has their own takleef and should make the appropriate decision based on the conditions surrounding them.

You know very well that the Ayah you brought forth is not giving us an unconditional ruling against severity in religion.

Severity is needed and accepted by both groups in many situations, no less in the issue of Nahi An Al-Munkar (which can be intertwined in many ways with bara'ah btw).

If you understand that, then why do you have a problem with people not wanting to curse the Sahaba in public?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, starlight said:

@Cyrax Firstly, There are several verses in the Quran where Allah has cursed iblis, Munafiqeen, disbelievers and certain nations like Aad and Thamud. There is also a verse which states that Prophet Dawood and Isa cursed with their tongue the disbelievers among Bani Israel (Maidah: verse 78) 

So I  hope this proves to you that there is nothing wrong per se or new with the act of sending a curse on someone. 

Next is what would the Ummah think if we curse someone from the times of Holy Prophet(saw). I think rather than worrying about what would the Ummah think we should be more concerned about Allah and Ahlebayt(as).How does Allah view the people who oppressed and massacred the Prophet's family? What does Prophet Muhammad (saw) think of the 'sahaba' who took away what was rightfully his daughter's and caused endless distress to her. 

I am not saying one starts cursing these personalities in front of say,sunnis who respect the Ahlebayt (as) and are willing to listen and maybe learn. But with people who are well aware of the wrong doings of those personalities yet defiantly defend them,I think there is no good coming out of sugar coating history.

 

You didn't need to prove anything to me بارك الله فيك as I mentioned in my initial post that Abu Lahab was cursed by name.

As far as the people that massacred Ahl al-Bayt, that includes Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Ayesha and Hafsa?  I don't understand history like you, so may be a better approach would be to FIRST prove that these people were oppressors, THEN you can go on a cursing spree.

However, at the end of the day, mainstream Muslims are always going to go the safe route and not curse the Sahaba (even if they see some wrong with some of their actions) because, a) no one is perfect, and b) Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

Quote

8    (And there is also a share in this booty) for the poor emigrants, who were expelled from their homes and their property, seeking Bounties from Allah and to please Him, and helping Allah (i.e. helping His religion) and His Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم). Such are indeed the truthful (to what they say).    
 
9    And (it is also for) those who, before them, had homes (in Al-Madinah) and had adopted the Faith, love those who emigrate to them, and have no jealousy in their breasts for that which they have been given (from the booty of Banu An-Nadir), and give them (emigrants) preference over themselves even though they were in need of that. And whosoever is saved from his own covetousness, such are they who will be the successful.    
 
10    And those who came after them say: "Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who have preceded us in Faith, and put not in our hearts any hatred against those who have believed. Our Lord! You are indeed full of kindness, Most Merciful. (Surat al-Hashr)

For me, cursing someone who might be a Mujahir or an Ansari is pretty much of the question in lue of these verses, بارك الله فيك, and most Muslims are going to feel the same way.  Justifying cursing these individuals because "Allah cursed the munafiqs" is pretty much a green light to let the person you're talking to know that you are not a person that should be listened to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

For me, cursing someone who might be a Mujahir or an Ansari is pretty much of the question in lue of these verses, بارك الله فيك, and most Muslims are going to feel the same way.  Justifying cursing these individuals because "Allah cursed the munafiqs" is pretty much a green light to let the person you're talking to know that you are not a person that should be listened to.

Unfortunately many shia  Arabic speakers in social media mostly on you  are influenced by Yaser al Habib & Allahyari & they easily curse & insult to 

Sunni personalitys althought it is forbidden by Marajis 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:bismillah:

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 159:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَىٰ مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ أُولَٰئِكَ يَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ

Surely those who conceal the clear proofs and the guidance that We revealed after We made it clear in the Book for men, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them (too).
(English - Shakir)

Who are "Laenoon"? Ohh they must be kafirs or mushriks I guess!

But wait here is another verse:

Surah Aal-e-Imran, Verse 61:
فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars.
(English - Shakir)

I think this makes clear who are included in the "Laenoon".

So what is the criteria of invoking the "Curse of Allah"? Are the above two verses not mentioning that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Abu Bakr, Omar,

Saqeefah,Fadak, Ghadeer,Martyrdom of Zahra (as)

20 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Uthman

Another usurper to the right to khilafat.

16 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Ayesha

Battle of jamal. Thousands of Muslims killed. 

If you want to argue thar Allah will forgive the abovementioned for their acts then Allah will surely forgive me cursing them too because no one is perfect, right?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, starlight said:

Saqeefah,Fadak, Ghadeer,Martyrdom of Zahra (as)

Another usurper to the right to khilafat.

Battle of jamal. Thousands of Muslims killed. 

If you want to argue thar Allah will forgive the abovementioned for their acts then Allah will surely forgive me cursing them too because no one is perfect, right?  

We should leave Ayesha our of it. Just because he was a wife of the Prophet. Also, we shouldn't curse anyone we could condemn their actions, and could call them out for their actions but shouldn't swear. 

Share this post


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

All you are doing by cursing these individuals is making you seem fundamentally incompatible with the rest of the Ummah.

Allahumma al'an qatalata Amiril Mo'mineen (asws)

Allahumma al'an Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan (L). 

If this make me incompatible with ummah, I am proud on not being a part of such ummah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

Just because he was a wife of the Prophet.

Yes, that's why Imam Ali (as) respectfully acompanied her to her back to her house after Jamal. 

We should be reminding her of the above fact, that she was the wife of Prophet and rebelling against the Imam of time and waging a battle between Muslims was not befitting to a woman of her standing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Salsabeel said:

Allahumma al'an qatalata Amiril Mo'mineen (asws)

Allahumma al'an Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan (L). 

I am totally fine with when people say this, but there are some people out there who use really bad words, and I am against that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, starlight said:

Yes, that's why Imam Ali (as) respectfully acompanied her to her back to her house after Jamal. 

We should be reminding her of the above fact, that she was the wife of Prophet and rebelling against the Imam of time and waging a battle between Muslims was not befitting to a woman of her standing. 

That's why I just say Lanat upon the enemies of Ahl-e-bayt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A request to those on this site with knowledge and with Hikmah to monitor discussions like this.  This is a sincere request for you not to remain silent if you have authority and insight.  Do it for the sake of Allah, not because an insignificant and anonymous virtual user has called for it. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, starlight said:

Yes, that's why Imam Ali (as) respectfully acompanied her to her back to her house after Jamal. 

Although I am not in favor of cursing her because of her relationship with Prophet (S) but you must mention her another sin when she came out from her house riding on mule to deny the burial of Imam Hassan (asws).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

You didn't need to prove anything to me بارك الله فيك as I mentioned in my initial post that Abu Lahab was cursed by name.

As far as the people that massacred Ahl al-Bayt, that includes Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Ayesha and Hafsa?  I don't understand history like you, so may be a better approach would be to FIRST prove that these people were oppressors, THEN you can go on a cursing spree.

 

Anyone who speaks abusively about major revered figures of other schools, will cause and incite enormous Fitnah. Even though we disagree with you concerning them, we need to use Hikmah, show mercy, and remain silent on these issues and not abuse, defame or talk in a less than dignified manner. Even in your eyes, someone who might peform L'anah is a sinner, one who performs it openly becomes a F'asiq.  And any Shia who decides to publicly talk about or encouraging this privately is absolutely daft and such behaviour is condemnable on this forum. 

Umm al-Mumineen Aisha, who was a chaste women and never in her life committed adultery as per Shia scholars, has performed some acts which we, have to respectfully but clearly tell you we do not agree with. I hope in this way, a civil and peaceful attempt can be made at discussing issues, and abuses, insults and slanders can be put to the side.

Example one

Ayesha said: “Safiyya, the wife of the Prophet (a), sent a dish she had made for him when he was with me. When I saw the maidservant, I trembled with rage and fury, and I took the bowl and hurled it away. The Prophet of Allah (a) then looked at me; I saw the anger in his face and I said to him: ‘I seek refuge from Allah’s Apostle cursing me today.’ The Prophet said: ‘Undo it’. I said: ‘What is its compensation, O Prophet of Allah?’ He said: ‘The food like her food, and a bowl like her bowl.’” 
1. Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Volume 6 page 227 Tradition 26409
2. Sunan Nasai, Volume 2 page 148
3. Majma al-Zawaed, Volume 4 page 372 Tradition 7692

The reviser of Musnad Ahmed namely Shaykh Shoib al-Arnaut declared the tradition to be ‘Hasan’ while Al-Haythami said:‘The narrators are Thiqah’.


Can you imagine if another noble wife of Rasullah s.a.w, Umm Safiyya r.a , out of care and love has sent the prophet s.a.w food, and Um Aisha , instead of recognizing the time, care and effort this wife has taken into preparing this food, out of anger, takes the food and hurls it into the ground, which is not only an insult to Allah swt, as it is a waste of food, but now you have a smashed bowl, an act commited out of extreme jealousy, and Rasullah s.a.w , a man so patient, even at this point being angered. If you took the name Aisha out of the equation and asked any muslim about this sort of behaviour, they would consider it completely out of order. 


Example two:

This time, even Allah swt has decided to reveal ayah's in the Quran about another event. 

In Saheeh Bukhari, a hadith deemed authentic by our sunni brothers and sisters, it is narrated: 
" Who were those two ladies who had backed each other (against the Prophet)?" Before I could complete my question, he (Umar) replied, "They were `Aisha and Hafsa."

Allah swt himself reveals ayahs about this event:

Noble Quran: "If you two [wives] repent to Allah , [it is best],for your hearts have deviated. But if you cooperate against him - then indeed Allah is his protector, and Gabriel and the righteous of the believers and the angels, moreover, are [his] assistants."

"Perhaps his Lord, if he divorced you [all], would substitute for him wives better than you - submitting [to Allah], believing, devoutly obedient, repentant, worshipping, and traveling - [ones] previously married and virgins."


The event, accepted by both sunni's and shia's, is another one where Umm Aisha out of jealousy of another wife of the prophet s.a.w, makes a plan for him to be lied to, with another wife, so she could spark disunity between him and another wife, and to upset that other wife. 

I only have to ask, is it right and just to lie to the prophet, and not just make any lie, make a lie whereby you make him feel ahamed of his breath, and cause disunity between and another wife - so much so Allah swt reveals in the Quran that your hearts have deviated, and if you continue the way you are, there is a possibility of Allah swt divorcing you altogether with better wives?

How can anyone play something like this down? 


Example three:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 168:

Narrated ‘Aisha: Once Hala bint Khuwailid, Khadija’s sister, asked the permission of the Prophet to enter. On that, the Prophet remembered the way Khadija used to ask permission, and that upset him. He said, “O Allah! Hala!” So I became jealous and said, “What makes you remember an old woman amongst the old women of Quraish an old woman (with a teethless mouth) of red gums who died long ago, and in whose place Allah has given you somebody better than her?” 

Lady Khadija was the closes and most honoured of the wives of Rasullah s.a.w, for her immense sacrifice to Islamand devotion to Rasullah s.a.w. Aisha here, refers to her as a teethless old woman who Allah swt has replaced with someone better than her - meaning herself. In some narrations, this angered Rasullah s.a.w Again, can you see a pattern between her behaviour with those she is , with the utmost and highest respect, she by her own admission is jealous of?


Example four:

We not only find examples of jealousy towards other wives, arguably the one we find her most in opposition to is Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s

Abdah b. ‘Abd al-Rahman from ‘Amro b. Muhammad from Yunes b. Abi Ishaq from al-‘Izar b. Hurayth from al-Nu’man b. Basheer, he said: One day Abu Bakr excused himself from the Prophet (saw) to leave him until he heard ‘Aisha saying in a loud voice; “By Allah, I have learned that ‘Ali (as) is more beloved to you than my father!”. Abu Bakr then came to hit her and said, “O daughter of so-and-so! I see that you raise your voice towards the Messenger of Allah?!”. Then the Prophet (saw) grabbed him and Abu Bakr left while furious. Then the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “O ‘Aisha! Have you seen how I saved you from the man?”. Then Abu Bakr excused himself and the Messenger of Allah (saw) made peace between Abu Bakr and ‘Aisha. [Khasa’is Amir al-Mu’mineen, al-Nasa’i, page 126, Hadeeth 110]

Grading: Isnad Saheeh (Authentic chain)

Points to consider: Why is she raising her voice at the messenger of Allah swt, in such a tone even her father is angered? Secondly, why do we find even the mere supicion that Rasullah s.a.w loves someone more than her father, , namely Ali a.s, anger her to such an extent she takes the name of Allah swt and raises her voice at the messenger of Allah swt?



When Ubaidullah Ibn Utbah mentioned to Ibn Abbas that Aisha said “In his death-illness the Prophet was brought to (Aisha’s) house while his shoulders were being supported by Fadhl Ibn Abbas and another person”, then Abdullah Ibn Abbas said: “Do you know who this ‘other man’ was?” Ibn Utbah replied: “No.” Then Ibn Abbas said: “He was Ali Ibn Abi Talib, but she is averse to name him in a good context.”

  1. Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, Volume 6 page 228 Tradition 25956

The margin writer of Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal namely Shaykh Shoib al-Arnaut stated:
“The chain is Sahih according to the standards of the two Sheiks (Bukhari & Muslim)”


This was also in Bukhari:


Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3 hadith 761:

Ubaidullah bin ‘Abdullah told me that ‘Aisha had said, “When the Prophet became sick and his condition became serious, he requested his wives to allow him to be treated in my house, and they allowed him. He came out leaning on two men while his feet were dragging on the ground. He was walking between Al-’Abbas and another man.” ‘Ubaidullah said, “When I informed Ibn ‘Abbas of what ‘Aisha had said, he asked me whether I knew who was the second man whom ‘Aisha had not named. I replied in the negative. He said, ‘He was ‘Ali bin Abi Talib.”



Point number five:


She raised an army against Ali ibn abi talib a.s. Some claim she was trying to avenge Uthman, but the consensus among all people is she made an error and repented. Rather than allowing the caliph of the time, Ali ibn abi talib a.s to sort things out, she brought dissent and took matters into her own hands, claiming the man in charge i.e Ali a.s, was not doing his duty. 

Now, some sunni brothers and sisters mention the khawarij, and how it was really them that caused the battle.

But the heart of the issue is that she should not have roused armies to try to avenge Uthman, against the orders of Ali a.s and against him, and not caused fitnah and left the matter to be dealt with by the caliph of the time, and not opposed him.



Sahih Muslim, Book 01, Number 141 :
Zirr reported:
'Ali observed: By Him Who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me.

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


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

Although I am not in favor of cursing her because of her relationship with Prophet (S) but you must mention her another sin when she came out from her house riding on mule to deny the burial of Imam Hassan (asws).

Yeah.. but let it go for now. She was the wife of Prophet and not to be cursed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Even in your eyes, someone who might peform L'anah is a sinner, one who performs it openly becomes a F'asiq

Care to explain? 

 

5 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

remain silent on these issues

You are telling people to remain silent about the oppression of Ahlebayt (as)???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Unfortunately many shia  Arabic speakers in social media mostly on you  are influenced by Yaser al Habib & Allahyari & they easily curse & insult to 

Sunni personalitys althought it is forbidden by Marajis 

I've actually found that it is the non-Arab speakers that do most of the la'an.  People like Yaser al-Habib are an anomaly from what I can see.  Allahyari is not an Arab speaker, although I will say, his Arabic is better than any non-Arab 12er Shi'a that I've personally witnessed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

:bismillah:

Surah Al-Baqara, Verse 159:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَا أَنزَلْنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَىٰ مِن بَعْدِ مَا بَيَّنَّاهُ لِلنَّاسِ فِي الْكِتَابِ أُولَٰئِكَ يَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّهُ وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ

Surely those who conceal the clear proofs and the guidance that We revealed after We made it clear in the Book for men, these it is whom Allah shall curse, and those who curse shall curse them (too).
(English - Shakir)

Who are "Laenoon"? Ohh they must be kafirs or mushriks I guess!

But wait here is another verse:

Surah Aal-e-Imran, Verse 61:
فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars.
(English - Shakir)

I think this makes clear who are included in the "Laenoon".

So what is the criteria of invoking the "Curse of Allah"? Are the above two verses not mentioning that?

Do you sincerely believe that based on quoting these verses that this means you have been given full fledged right to curse anyone including Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman and Ayesha?  This sort of rhetoric, while it may make sense to you, would just turn off the average Muslim immediately.  This is what this thread is about, not what the Shi'a justifications for cursing are, (which I already know).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, starlight said:

Care to explain? 

 

You are telling people to remain silent about the oppression of Ahlebayt (as)???

I'm talking about Sunni Fiqh with regards to certain acts.

As for remaining silent, no-one here is claiming we remain silent. I have told you this, with the utmost respect many times. I have cited many examples where i have spoken out against Saqifah, against the certain things the wife of the Messenger of Allah had done, but only i have done it in a respectful way, understanding the high positions they are held in. 

Again, another request, those on here with authority, recognise how, owing to the lurkers we have here, a discussion about abusing and performing L'anah on specific individuals already named may not be conducive to anyones best interest. I didn't say lock or ban, but monitor this thread closely. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, starlight said:

Saqeefah,Fadak, Ghadeer,Martyrdom of Zahra (as)

Another usurper to the right to khilafat.

Battle of jamal. Thousands of Muslims killed. 

If you want to argue thar Allah will forgive the abovementioned for their acts then Allah will surely forgive me cursing them too because no one is perfect, right?  

I don't believe Fatima al-Zahra عليها السلام was killed, rather she died a natural death.  I also believe she died approving of Abu Bakr, that's why sources say.  Quoting one narration here and there (from Ayesha nonetheless, who was not part of incident) won't negate the dozens or reports that say the opposite.

If Fadak was oppression against Fatima عليها السلام, it would've also been oppression against Ayesha and Hafsa and the other wives of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم because they too would've gotten a share.

Ghadeer and Saqeefah are intretpreted differently by us.  I don't think Ghadeer has ANYTHING to do with Imamah or politics and Saqeefah is an unfortunate incident that led to best possible scenario playing out any way (from my view); Abu Bakr, then Omar, then Uthman then Ali, the 4 best of the Ummah took over.

And as far as Allah forgiving you for cursing them, then I hope that is the case

Share this post


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

Do you sincerely believe that based on quoting these verses that this means you have been given full fledged right to curse anyone including Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman and Ayesha?  This sort of rhetoric, while it may make sense to you, would just turn off the average Muslim immediately.  This is what this thread is about, not what the Shi'a justifications for cursing are, (which I already know).

A prime example as to why threads like this should be minotired. It's a highly sensitive issue and being bombarded with Lay people - like myself, leaving a Sunni brother with one long lasting perception as to who we are.

Wake up, those with insight and authority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

no-one here is claiming we remain silent.

 "we need to use Hikmah, show mercy, and remain silent on these issues "

Wasn't this you who wrote this minutes ago? ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Do you sincerely believe that based on quoting these verses that this means you have been given full fledged right to curse anyone including Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman and Ayesha?

If they are those:

1. Who conceal the clear proof & guidance.

2. Mix up truth with falsehood.

3 Liars (specifically before the Ahlul Bayt as verse 3:61 mentions them as Sadiqeen)

Then curse of Allah is already on them whether I curse them or not. I am personally not the pure soul to invoke the curse of Allah on anyone of them.

Edited by Salsabeel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cyrax said:

I don't believe Fatima al-Zahra عليها السلام was killed, rather she died a natural death. 

I don't believe there is any good evidence she was physically attacked by a group of men either. This is not from the Aqa'id issues of the Sheeah. However, i must say there is an authentic chain going up to the slave of the Caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab as per Sunni Hadith sciences whereby it is clear Umar made a threat. There are many other chains and corroborating witnesses.  In my view, even making a threat alone on the house of the daughter of the Messenger of Allah is worthy of condemnation, wouldn't you agree? Are you aware why the second Caliph went to the door of Fatima and made that threat? It was because Ali ibn Abi Talib , the Banu Hashim and a number of their companions rejected the authority of the first Caliph, Abu Bakr.

Umar said: “‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Zubair Ibn Awwam and those who were with them separated from us (and gathered) in the house of Fatimah, daughter of the messenger of Allah.”

References:  [1] Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55 [2] Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309 [3] History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, p1822 [4] History of Tabari, English version, v9, p192

“And no doubt after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ) we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa`da. `Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr.

References: [1] Sahih Bukhari :Book 86 [Kitab Al Hudud] Chapter 31.

“Narrated Muhammad bin Bashir from Ubaidllah bin Umar from Zaid bin Aslam that his father Aslam said: ‘When the homage (baya) went to Abu Bakr after the Messenger of Allah, Ali and Zubair were entering into the house of Fatima to consult her and revise their issue, so when Umar came to know about that, he went to Fatima and said : ‘Oh daughter of Messenger of Allah, no one is dearest to us more than your father and no one dearest to us after your father than you, I swear by Allah, if these people gathered in your house then nothing will prevent me from giving order to burn the house and those who are inside.’

References: [1] Musnaf of Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah, Volume 7 page 432 Tradition 37045. [Saheeh Chain]

 

 

Reliability of the tradition of Aslam Al-Qurashi

 

All of the narrators are above are Thiqah, considered to be trustworthy and reliable, and we will go through each and every narrator:

Muhammad bin Bashir: Imam Al-Dhahabi said: ‘Thabt’ (Al-Kaashif, v2 p159), Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani said: ‘Thiqa’(Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p58). 

Ubaidllah bin Umar: Al-Dhahabi said: ‘Thabt’ (Al-Kaashif, v1 p685), Ibn Hajar Asqalani said: ‘Thiqa Thabt’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p637). 

Zaid bin Aslam: Al-Dhahabi said: ‘Hujja’ (Siar alam alnubala, v5 p316), Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani said: ‘Thiqa’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p326). 

Aslam al-Qurashi (the slave of Umar): Al-Dhahabi said: ‘Faqih, Imam’ (Siar alam alnubala, v4 p98), Ibn Hajar Asqalani said: ‘Thiqa’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p88).

 

https://whoaretheshia.com/2017/10/31/aftermath-ix/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, starlight said:

 "we need to use Hikmah, show mercy, and remain silent on these issues "

Wasn't this you who wrote this minutes ago? ^^

Silent on being on a website where people who curse are banned, but then allow a fully fledged discussion about how you're okay to do it privately. That shouldn't be allowed. Cursing them, or publicly encouraging people to curse them. I fear engaging in this discussion with yourself any further will put a spot light on the issue, which is the opposite of what i want. 

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

 

Allahumma al'an qatalata Amiril Mo'mineen (asws)

Allahumma al'an Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan (L). 

If this make me incompatible with ummah, I am proud on not being a part of such ummah.

Considering there has been so many replies, I'm going to just make this one massive reply.  I hope this doesn't bother anyone إن شاء الله.

As far as this post is concerned, I generally have a no-discussion policy with people who don't want to be part of the Muslim Ummah while claiming to be Muslim.  It doesn't matter of he is a khariji or a 12er, I found those two extremes to be people that you can't have a conversation with.

24 minutes ago, starlight said:

Yes, that's why Imam Ali (as) respectfully acompanied her to her back to her house after Jamal. 

We should be reminding her of the above fact, that she was the wife of Prophet and rebelling against the Imam of time and waging a battle between Muslims was not befitting to a woman of her standing. 

Exactly, she fell into error, like other Sahaba did (please note that my definition of Sahaba includes that four khulafa).  Does this justify cursing her?  I know this is not a mainstream practices, but does justify "celebrating her death?"

24 minutes ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

I am totally fine with when people say this, but there are some people out there who use really bad words, and I am against that. 

People can be critical of whoever they want, but we are here to discuss la'nah and sabb.  Could you imagine what would happen if a Sunni speaker (even one speaking to a handful of people) described ANYONE of being lower than dogs and pigs.  Unfortunately, one of the greatest 12er scholars of the last 100 years said that about Ayesha, believe it or not.

23 minutes ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

That's why I just say Lanat upon the enemies of Ahl-e-bayt. 

Ameen.

21 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

A request to those on this site with knowledge and with Hikmah to monitor discussions like this.  This is a sincere request for you not to remain silent if you have authority and insight.  Do it for the sake of Allah, not because an insignificant and anonymous virtual user has called for it. 

Do what for the sake of Allah?

19 minutes ago, Salsabeel said:

Although I am not in favor of cursing her because of her relationship with Prophet (S) but you must mention her another sin when she came out from her house riding on mule to deny the burial of Imam Hassan (asws).

Not considered authentic.

16 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

*snip*

I asked respectfully in the first post, no cutting and pasting.  You are free to do what you want, but in the context of this thread, I'm going to ignore it.

 

12 minutes ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

@Cyrax

 

I'm going to include this under copy and paste.  However, I hope you realize that my understanding of Imam Ali عليه السلام's character comes from mainstream Sunni sources; while I respect Kamal al-Haydari, I don't consider the 12er hadeeth literature to be reliable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

Ghadeer and Saqeefah are intretpreted differently by us.  I don't think Ghadeer has ANYTHING to do with Imamah or politics and Saqeefah is an unfortunate incident that led to best possible scenario playing out any way (from my view); Abu Bakr, then Omar, then Uthman then Ali, the 4 best of the Ummah took over.

I am sure in your current state of mind, if you heard Abu Bakr was named Caliph, you would have rejoiced. You would have heard - or believed - in the narrations whereby the Pophet (saw) regarded him the best of the Ummah, extolled is merits, and you would have felt at the time no-one could be better than he to lead. So why my dear brother ,do we find Ali ibn Abi Talib opposing Abu Bakr for many, many months until the death of Fatima binte Muhammed?

 

Umar said: “‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, Zubair Ibn Awwam and those who were with them separated from us (and gathered) in the house of Fatimah, daughter of the messenger of Allah.”

References:  [1] Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, p55 [2] Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn Hisham, v4, p309 [3] History of Tabari (Arabic), v1, p1822 [4] History of Tabari, English version, v9, p192

“And no doubt after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ) we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa`da. `Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr.

References: [1] Sahih Bukhari :Book 86 [Kitab Al Hudud] Chapter 31.

 

From Saheeh al-Bukhari: "So Abu Bakr refused to give anything of that to Fatima. So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not task to him till she died. She remained alive for six months after the death of the Prophet. When she died, her husband `Ali, buried her at night without informing Abu Bakr and he said the funeral prayer by himself. When Fatima was alive, the people used to respect `Ali much, but after her death, `Ali noticed a change in the people's attitude towards him.... `Ali had not given the oath of allegiance during those months (i.e. the period between the Prophet's death and Fatima's death)."

https://sunnah.com/bukhari/64/278

 

Objection one: Ali ibn Abi Talib was just aggrieved he had not been consulted:

Reply:  If Ali ibn Abi Talib’s grievance was that he was not consulted, then had he been consulted, would he have opted for anyone other than Abu Bakr to lead after the Prophet [saw]? If he would naturally have chosen Abu Bakr, than why would he grieve at all?  Why would he forsake it for six whole months, until the death of Fatima binte Muhammed ? Does it not seem like a normal action for people who are close, love each other, and for one who recognises the merits and superiority of Abu Bakr to meet with him to immediately discuss his differences, rather than withholding from him for six whole months, which is an enormous percentage of the time Abu Bakr was Caliph himself? If he was merely sad about not being consulted, would he not talk about this grievance to Abu Bakr? If you had a difference with Abu Bakr, would you withhold it at all, and if you did, would it not be for a few days at most while you reflected on the situation?

Objection two: There were no compulsion in him to give his allegiance [nor all of the prominent men], and by withholding it he was not opposing or rebelling:

Reply: Some argue that there was no compulsion on him to give his allegiance, and that he did not oppose Abu Bakr, but rather,  withheld it. This opinion is very weak, considering that Ali ibn Abi Talib was considered at least one of the four best men after the Prophet [saw] and at a time where the Ridda wars were occurring and the Prophet [saw] had just died, a young Ummah needed men of high status like Ali ibn Abi Talib falling in line and showing their support for the leader. There is a saying that ones silence is more telling than ones words, and by opposing Abu Bakr, and then withholding to give him the allegiance until after six months, Ali ibn Abi Talib was making a very strong statement.   It is also of importance here to note the great emphasis given in traditions where after six months, Ali ibn Abi Talib then gives his allegiance. One must ask if it is not important for everyone to do so, but only some prominent men, why does he then give it? Did he not see Abu Bakr in Medina, and did he not speak to him [as Sunni’s state]. If so, would it not have been a simple matter for him to merely give his allegiance? This is arguably one of the weaker objections – but we can understand why many Sunni scholars have sought to use it, considering the alternative shakes the very foundations of beliefs regarding the reality of this event.

Objection three: We have authentic traditions which state Ali ibn Abi Talib gave his allegiance right away.

Reply: It is telling there are traditions which directly contradict the above narrations in Saheeh Bukhari and Muslim and the understanding of many of the Sunni Ulema who have sought to explain the delay of Ali ibn Abi Talib, such as Imam Nawawi in his ‘Sharh Saheeh Muslim’.  This can not be an objection taken seriously, considering it has been established what has been narrated in the two saheehs, and great contradictions  hi-light the major flaw in the Ilm al Rijal utilised and assumptions made about whether certain men are trustworthy or not.

From: https://whoaretheshia.com/2017/10/31/aftermath-ix/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Cyrax said:

This sort of rhetoric, while it may make sense to you, would just turn off the average Muslim immediately

I don't care what turns them off or on. There is always no shame in telling the truth and what else can be the truth if not the words of God and Ahlul Bayt (asws)?

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...