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

Shias and Sahaba

Rate this topic


Message added by notme

Cursing of the 3 "Caliphs" (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman by name or number) and of any of the Holy Prophet's ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) wives, as well as Sunni scholars is strictly prohibited. This involves cursing by name, swear words and defamatory language. The Moderator/Admin team also reserves the right to edit/delete or not approve posts or profile comments or ban members in accordance with the application of these rules. Respect is the only way to keep peace between the 2 parties and allow constructive discussions. In response to the bold offering of praise to the enemies of Islam and the enemies of the Ahlul Bayt (for example, praise of Muawiyah and Yazeed by some members on this board), the ShiaChat team have decided to warn (or ban if warnings are exhausted) any member who offers such open praise to these killers of the Ahlul Bayt and the pious Companions.

 

See rule #3.

Recommended Posts

  • Basic Members

Sunnis believe that those who consider Abu Bakr and Umar as Kafirs are apostates and not Muslims. As a Sunni I do not believe Shiites are Kafirs.

Here ,  Shiite friends please reveal theirposition on these two and other Sahaba. I would like to know the position of classical Shiite scholars also in this regard. Hope you will help me

Edited by notme
Removed "closed/review" tag.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, jaferpilakkal@India said:

Sunnis believe that those who consider Abu Bakr and Umar as Kafirs are apostates and not Muslims. As a Sunni I do not believe Shiites are Kafirs.

Here ,  Shiite friends please reveal theirposition on these two and other Sahaba. I would like to know the position of classical Shiite scholars also in this regard. Hope you will help me

There are three groups of sahaba /companions of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in the light of the verses of Qur'an and hadith:

1. The companions who were loyal and obedient to the Prophet s.aw in his life and they followed the true teaching of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and Islam after his life. They are well respected but they are considered in minority.

:2. The companions who were believers in the life of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) but they used to disobey the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) instructions on many or certain occasions in his life.

3.  The companions who were not true Muslim but accepted the faith of Islam and they used to spent the life apparently in the light of Islam .but their hearts were against it they were hypocrites. they have been threatened to go out of fold of Islam in the verses of Qur'an and hadith of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

I hope this simple and concise explanation clarifies Shia view. the detail can be seen at the following link:

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
15 hours ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Salam alaikum,

There are many threads that deal with this issue. But I will just explain briefly

Yes, we highly criticise and highly reject the first caliphs, along with every other sahaba that turned their backs away from the Prophet's (sawas) message.  Before the Holy Prophet (sawas) passed away, he delivered a sermon which im pretty sure you're familiar of, the event of Ghadir Khumm, when he announced that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) would be his successor. However, Sunni Muslims tend to interpret this narration quite differently, saying that the Prophet only meant that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was considered as a friend and not necessarily caliph, as the word "Mawla" can have many different interpretations. Now logically speaking, the holy Prophet (sawas) wouldn't just invite thousands of Muslims to this sermon to only announce that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was his friend, besides it was a command from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) that he had to deliver this important message in order to complete Islam; there were 2 ayahs that were sent down (forgot which ones but ill post it soon) and based on the importance of this command how is it logical to say that the word mawla literally meant just a friend? 

Most of these companions committed alot of mischief after the Holy Prophet and even during his reign and im not saying this as an offence but merely stating the truth, the problem is that alot of people don't choose to read. Either they choose to hide the truth or they don't want to read at all. Most of the reasons why we're against them is based on many narrations that can be found mostly in Sunni books, and I was shocked myself to see this especially in books like sahih bukhari because alot of the things that they believe in actually contradict to what is mentioned in their books, especially about the companions

currently im busy, but when I do have time inshallah, I will send them here

but our main belief against the sahaba is that majority of them deviated and went against the Prophet's (sawas) message and stole the rights of Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

fee amanillah

Thanks for reply.

But I would like to know what this deviation means... Is it apostasy (Kufr) or  Committing Sin (Kabira)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 9/26/2019 at 1:12 AM, jaferpilakkal@India said:

But I would like to know what this deviation means... Is it apostasy (Kufr) or  Committing Sin (Kabira)?

Sin.. they were munafiqs and there is surah in Qur'an about those kind of sahabas who Allah is talking about in surah munafiqun ,I would suggest you read surah munafiqun and there is also a Sunni sahi hadith about them

Narrated `Abdullah:

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount (Kauthar) and some men amongst you will be brought to me, and when I will try to hand them some water, they will be pulled away from me by force whereupon I will say, 'O Lord, my companions!' Then the Almighty will say, 'You do not know what they did after you left, they introduced new things into the religion after you.'"

حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ، عَنْ مُغِيرَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي وَائِلٍ، قَالَ قَالَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ أَنَا فَرَطُكُمْ عَلَى الْحَوْضِ، لَيُرْفَعَنَّ إِلَىَّ رِجَالٌ مِنْكُمْ حَتَّى إِذَا أَهْوَيْتُ لأُنَاوِلَهُمُ اخْتُلِجُوا دُونِي فَأَقُولُ أَىْ رَبِّ أَصْحَابِي‏.‏ يَقُولُ لاَ تَدْرِي مَا أَحْدَثُوا بَعْدَكَ ‏"‏‏.‏

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 7049

In-book reference : Book 92, Hadith 2

USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 9, Book 88, Hadith 173

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pschological Warfare
On 9/25/2019 at 6:49 AM, jaferpilakkal@India said:

Sunnis believe that those who consider Abu Bakr and Umar as Kafirs are apostates and not Muslims. As a Sunni I do not believe Shiites are Kafirs.

Here ,  Shiite friends please reveal theirposition on these two and other Sahaba. I would like to know the position of classical Shiite scholars also in this regard. Hope you will help me

Title of this Thread/Topic is "Shia and Sahaba". Which implies that Shia's have an issue with the Sahaba's. ( the companions ). 

There were at least 100,000 plus Sahaba's at the last Pilgrimage. Most people today, do not even know most of them or their names. Nor the Books of Hadith quote from all the Sahaba's. Hadith books utilize few selected ones who present the Majority of the Hadith for common people. 

According to you, Imam Ali(عليه السلام) is a Shahaba also. along with Ammar, Abu Dhar, ....

So, it can't that Shia's have an issue with the Sahaba's - This was the propaganda spread by the illegitimate ones. 

-----

Now, when you write you mention Three particular Sahaba's- The Real issue is not Shia and Sahaba's its Shia view of the few Selected Sahaba. Let say 10 sahaba

10 divided by 100,000 equals what ? % 

Now you see the problem, with this  blanket statement. 

Before, any one entertains the question of yes/no. 

Why are these three so important to you? what were their merits that, they need to be singled out among the 100, 000 plus Sahaba's

Any special designation given to these three by Allah(عزّ وجلّ) and explained by Muhammad al-Mustafa(peace be upon him and his pure progeny) over the other 100,000 plus ? 

Is this belief in them tied with Tawheed, or Allah(عزّ وجلّ) command that the  rejection of them will amount to been shirk/kafir? 

Lastly, there were Sahaba's who committed mistakes and ' It was/is under the error of judgement" clause so, why straight to Kafir - why not put it under the same classification ? 

Where these three the most qualified to be followed, that we are guilty of not following them ? 

If we choose to not follow them, or take Religion these three- is their an injunction from Allah(عزّ وجلّ) or the Muhammad al- Mustafa (peace be upon him and his pure progeny) that we have violated? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 9/25/2019 at 6:49 AM, jaferpilakkal@India said:

Sunnis believe that those who consider Abu Bakr and Umar as Kafirs are apostates and not Muslims. As a Sunni I do not believe Shiites are Kafirs.

Here ,  Shiite friends please reveal theirposition on these two and other Sahaba. I would like to know the position of classical Shiite scholars also in this regard. Hope you will help me

There is no real and objective truth / reality except God Himself.

Shias tend to emphasize the principle of justice (adalat) to such an extent they attempt to take justice in their own hands by doing something humans are not meant to do, judge someone else’s heart and intentions.  The truth is that they fail to comprehend the limits of human reason when it comes to judgments.  This is the weakness of Shias.  
 

Sunnis should not be so quick to judge Shias and call them Kafir unless they want to share in the same fault as the very ones they are accusing. Majority of Shias are simply taught from Avery young age everything negative about the revered companions in Sunni Islam.  There is not a single praiseworthy trait Shias can imagine or think about and this is a sign that they brainwashed.  They cannot be blamed for their ignorance but they should be blamed for their laziness and apathy when they insist of their views without question and especially when confronted with a competing narrative of events.  They have a bad a opinion of everyone they don’t agree with.  Their minds will creative all kinds of conspiracies just so they can justify their false beliefs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@eThErEaL

You've said quite a lot there. Perhaps offer some examples to back your claims up? 

Judging hearts and intentions? 

Conspiracies to justify false beliefs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 12/2/2019 at 4:41 PM, eThErEaL said:
On 9/25/2019 at 6:49 AM, jaferpilakkal@India said:

Sunnis believe that those who consider Abu Bakr and Umar as Kafirs are apostates and not Muslims. As a Sunni I do not believe Shiites are Kafirs.

Here ,  Shiite friends please reveal theirposition on these two and other Sahaba. I would like to know the position of classical Shiite scholars also in this regard. Hope you will help me

There is no real and objective truth / reality except God Himself.

Shias tend to emphasize the principle of justice (adalat) to such an extent they attempt to take justice in their own hands by doing something humans are not meant to do, judge someone else’s heart and intentions.  The truth is that they fail to comprehend the limits of human reason when it comes to judgments.  This is the weakness of Shias.  

Sunnis should not be so quick to judge Shias and call them Kafir unless they want to share in the same fault as the very ones they are accusing. Majority of Shias are simply taught from Avery young age everything negative about the revered companions in Sunni Islam.  There is not a single praiseworthy trait Shias can imagine or think about and this is a sign that they brainwashed.  They cannot be blamed for their ignorance but they should be blamed for their laziness and apathy when they insist of their views without question and especially when confronted with a competing narrative of events.  They have a bad a opinion of everyone they don’t agree with.  Their minds will creative all kinds of conspiracies just so they can justify their false beliefs

The only guys that are clearly brainwashed are you lot. Seriously ? You can take back what u said about conspiracy theories because every single belief of ours is not only backed up by narrations but also the holy Qur'an itself. But most of youse don’t bother to read and conceal the truth. Those narrative of events are mentioned in your own [edit] books. Or do y’all keep using the same excuse “they’re the Sahaba no matter what, we should still respect them”. 

While I agree that we shouldn’t judge one’s heart and intentions, the vile actions these so called companions have committed are already proof enough of what their intentions were. Stealing the rights of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), is that something that can be ignored just because we can’t judge someone’s intentions? So tell me what other purpose was it ? That’s like saying we shouldn’t judge a thief’s intention of stealing despite him stealing . The weakness youse probably have is lack of logic .

On 12/2/2019 at 4:41 PM, eThErEaL said:

They cannot be blamed for their ignorance but they should be blamed for their laziness and apathy when they insist of their views without question

No, that’s an issue you guys have. Your beliefs literally make no sense. You call us lazy when in fact we  are the ones who Have to explain thousands of times why those false beliefs y’all have created about us contradict to what we truly believe in. And we use the Qur'an as our main source, then we back it up with ahadith. The problem with youse is that you refuse to go on the touchy subjects like the Wilayah of Imam Ali (عليه السلام), or the even of Ghadir. Because y’all know that it will stir up a lot of questions. 

Edited by Hameedeh
Inappropriate words
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 9/25/2019 at 6:49 AM, jaferpilakkal@India said:

Shiite friends please reveal their position on these two and other Sahaba. I would like to know the position of classical Shiite scholars also in this regard. Hope you will help me

Brother

The three caliphs were all men of different character.

Briefly, 

  • Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) was the best of the three but he had some faults.

          He caused great grief to Lady Fatima ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) and also to Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

  • Umar (رضي الله عنه) was the one who prevented the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) from writing a Will.

           He was rash and erratic and questioned the Holy Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) a number of times.

  • Uthman (رضي الله عنه) was a very unjust man. 

          He filled the government with his relatives who committed great mistakes.

          He exiled the Prophet's companion Abu Zar Ghaffari to the desert for no fault.

Everything I have written is in history books accepted by all Sunnis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 12/2/2019 at 5:41 PM, eThErEaL said:

Majority of Shias are simply taught from Avery young age everything negative about the revered companions in Sunni Islam.

We are simply taught what is in both Sunni and Shia books. Let's get it clear that no one is in disagreement as to what took place. We all know that Aisha  waged a war against Imam Ali (عليه السلام) when she should have not left her house. We all know the crimes of Muhawiya (la) etc. Trust me, not a single human being can deny what took place in history. Even how Umar (la) refused to let Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) write something before his death. What brainwashing are you talking about? Are we only being told what is in our books? No, we're told to constantly study history (Sunni books as well) and observe the hypocrites who chose to follow their own selfish desires rather than the footsteps of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). Can you name me how many companions existed? Probs over 10000 and how many do Shias hate? Probably a few. 

Rather, Sunnis aren't exposed to the truth. It's a shame how so many don't even know about what took place. They're the ones being brainwashed. Why don't their sheikhs tell them to study our books? Why can't you find a single Shia book in Wahhabi libraries? Whereas Shias don't have an issue with their books?

No offence but you made a very absurd argument. No logic.

 

Edited by notme
Cursing Sunni revered person
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

The truth is that they fail to comprehend the limits of human reason when it comes to judgments.  This is the weakness of Shias

Again would you care to explain such vague statements? 

Shias believe that everything in Islam aligns with human reason. Things may go beyond our reason but they can never go against it. Understand the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, baqar said:

Brother

The three caliphs were all men of different character.

Briefly, 

  • Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) was the best of the three but he had some faults.

          He caused great grief to Lady Fatima ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) and also to Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

Once Imam Ali (عليه السلام) (Even as a Caliph) lost a court case over an item that was stolen from him just because there weren’t sufficient witnesses to prove his case.  He accepted the judgement of the judge as God’s will and would have in fact reprimanded the judge if the judge simply took Imam Ali (عليه السلام) side for being an Imam or Kaliph.  The grief Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) caused was inevitable since he (in the capacity of a judge and caliph) was being strict (as was expected) and was doing his job.    I am not saying Fadak was not Seyyeda Fatima(عليه السلام) right, it truly belonged to her and it was her right to have Fadak.  

Quote
  • Umar (رضي الله عنه) was the one who prevented the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) from writing a Will.

this is because he couldn’t bear to see the Prophet (S) undergo any more difficulty And hardship.  It was due to his love for him (S)

Quote

           He was rash and erratic and questioned the Holy Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) a number of times.

This was a trait he had and yet the Prophet (S) chose him as a close companion.  So Muslims love him (رضي الله عنه) because of that. We hope that by merely being associated with the Prophet (S) by being in his Ummah we will receive the Prophet’s (S) intercession on the day of Judgement despite our mistakes and vices. (Inshallah)

Despite all the mistakes he may have done, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) would advice The Caliph Umar (رضي الله عنه) not to go to the front lines in a war so that his life would not end prematurely and because the Ummah needs a Caliph.... this is in Shia Books as well (even basic madressa books of Shias by the way)

Quote

 

about Uthman....

          He filled the government with his relatives who committed great mistakes.

Everything I have written is in history books accepted by all Sunnis. 

And yet, Imam Hasan And Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) were ordered by Imam Ali (عليه السلام) to defend his life from those that wanted to attack him.  

Edited by eThErEaL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

Once Imam Ali (عليه السلام) (Even as a Caliph) lost a court case over an item that was stolen from him just because there weren’t sufficient witnesses to prove his case.  He accepted the judgement of the judge as God’s will and would have in fact reprimanded the judge if the judge simply took Imam Ali (عليه السلام) side for being an Imam or Kaliph.

im confused what are you trying to imply here?

On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

 The grief Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) caused was inevitable since he (in the capacity of a judge and caliph) was being strict (as was expected) and was doing his job.    I am not saying Fadak was not Seyyeda Fatima(عليه السلام) right, it truly belonged to her and it was her right to have Fadak.  

So if it was truly her (عليه السلام) right, why didn't he give it to her? What you're implying here about Abu Bakr is completely baseless. And whoever angered Fatima (عليه السلام) has angered the Holy Prophet (sawas) and whoever angered him has angered Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). You are well aware that she didn't forgive him after that

Not trying to defend Abu Bakr, but one thing about him was that he apparently showed a side of guilt. As Fatima al Zahra (عليه السلام) refused to forgive him and Umar, Abu Bakr stood outside her house underneath the sun and told Umar that he would remain in this position until he recieves her forgiveness. But it was Umar who was convincing him to not worry being unforgiven by a woman.

On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

this is because he couldn’t bear to see the Prophet (S) undergo any more difficulty And hardship.  It was due to his love for him (S)

I normally think that I am the most naive person but then when I look at this im like .....

On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

Despite all the mistakes he may have done, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) would advice The Caliph Umar (رضي الله عنه) not to go to the front lines in a war so that his life would not end prematurely and because the Ummah needs a Caliph.... this is in Shia Books as well (even basic madressa books of Shias by the way)

that is clearly because of Imam Ali (as)' character and humbleness. Doesn't give proof that Shias have some kind of respect for Umar. Imam Ali (عليه السلام) didn't fight the first 3 caliphs and refused to do so especially when Abu Sufyan whom you guys believe was a righteous man was the one who attempted to try and convince him to fight. But Imam Ali (عليه السلام) did not want any war and bloodshed between Muslims and hence he remained quiet. And he did remind the companions many times that Rasullulah (sawas) appointed him as a successor and the events that took place proving it.  They knew he was right, but they were all hungry for power.

On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

And yet, Imam Hasan And Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) were ordered by Imam Ali (عليه السلام) to defend his life from those that wanted to attack him.  

my point mentioned above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pschological Warfae
On 9/25/2019 at 6:49 AM, jaferpilakkal@India said:

Sunnis believe that those who consider Abu Bakr and Umar as Kafirs are apostates and not Muslims. As a Sunni I do not believe Shiites are Kafirs.

Here ,  Shiite friends please reveal theirposition on these two and other Sahaba. I would like to know the position of classical Shiite scholars also in this regard. Hope you will help me

This is a 1400 year old issue. Disregarding  and not focusing on what they did to harm the Religion. 

Let's look it from a different and more appropriate angle. 

"They" were not qualified to lead the Muslims.

Nor are they qualified to lead the Muslims today.

Not the best role model  to emulate.

Not the best source or the path to reach the real teachings of Muhammad Al- Mustafa (peace be upon him and his pure progeny). 

End of Story. 

Anyone disagree? Make you intellectual/Rational/logical/Dispassionate case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

im confused what are you trying to imply here?

what I am saying is that sometimes verdicts were given which were “objectively” incorrect but still “intentionally just”.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

So if it was truly her (عليه السلام) right, why didn't he give it to her?

why wasn’t the disputed sword or shield (or whatever item it was) given to Imam Ali (عليه السلام) if it truly belonged to him?  Because it was the verdict given based on the intention of being just. 

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

What you're implying here about Abu Bakr is completely baseless. And whoever angered Fatima (عليه السلام) has angered the Holy Prophet (sawas) and whoever angered him has angered Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). You are well aware that she didn't forgive him after that

Some narrations say that but others say that he was forgiven by her.  Perhaps those who say he was never forgiven are unaware that he was forgiven.  In any case it wasn’t Abu Bakr’s intention to anger Seyyeda Fatima (عليه السلام).  Seyyeda Fatima (عليه السلام) was not concerned about material wealth such as Fadak but was grieving for the loss of her beloved Father (Seyyidina Muhammad Mustafa S)) and so Fadak had sentimental value for her.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Not trying to defend Abu Bakr, but one thing about him was that he apparently showed a side of guilt.

Any judge that gives such a verdict would.  This is in fact proof for how much love Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) had for Fatima (عليه السلام).  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

As Fatima al Zahra (عليه السلام) refused to forgive him and Umar, Abu Bakr stood outside her house underneath the sun and told Umar that he would remain in this position until he recieves her forgiveness. But it was Umar who was convincing him to not worry being unforgiven by a woman

this shows how much love Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) had for her.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

I normally think that I am the most naive person but then when I look at this im like .....

we can agree to disagree.  This is where I urge you to give the benefit of the doubt and to practice Husn Al-Zhan (Having a good opinion).  This is honesty how I see it.  I have no doubt in my heart the Umar (رضي الله عنه) and Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه)  truly loved the Prophet (S) and that Umar said what he said only out of love for the Prophet (S) because he didn’t want him to undergo any more difficulty.  
 

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

That is clearly because of Imam Ali (as)' character and humbleness.

so let us follow his example and not disrespect the Umar (رضي الله عنه) and Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه).  Asking God to to withdraw His mercy from them is certainly not something Imam Ali (عليه السلام) would have done.  Why else would he go out of his way to protect them?  We should go out of our way as wel to protect them.  I am just trying to be a Shia is Imam Ali (عليه السلام).  May God accept my intentions.

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Doesn't give proof that Shias have some kind of respect for Umar. Imam Ali (عليه السلام) didn't fight the first 3 caliphs and refused to do so especially when Abu Sufyan

It means Shias should follow his example.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

whom you guys

Please....

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

 

believe was a righteous man was the one who attempted to try and convince him to fight. But Imam Ali (عليه السلام) did not want any war and bloodshed between Muslims and hence he remained quiet.

yes. And so we should follow Imam Ali’s (عليه السلام) example and not seek discord or bloodshed.  In fact be protective of them. Talking about negative traits they have is not good.  So desist for the sake of a Imam Ali (عليه السلام).  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

And he did remind the companions many times that Rasullulah (sawas) appointed him as a successor and the events that took place proving it.  They knew he was right, but they were all hungry for power.

No, they were not hungry for power.  This is your interpretation which is based on the sickness of certain people’s hearts who do not have the virtue of practicing Husn Al-Zhan.  
 

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

No they were all power hungry and looking to exploit their “closeness” to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) their whole time. However, the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) who has unseen knowledge did not see that coming lol.

@eThErEaL I wish more Shias questioned the black and white narrative that is shoved down their throat at a young age. I was the same way until I looked into history more and fell upon several of the points you brought up.

As a traditional Shia you are taught to pick between Sahaba or AhlalBayt. There is no middle ground. The sahaba hated the AhlalBayt and vice versa. However looking at it from a critical perspective, one comes to realize this is far from the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ulil amri is mentioned twice in the Qur'an ie verses 4:59 and 4:83.

Surely ulil amri was a new word to the companions.

Not being born a Shia, I find it quite perplexing that there’re hadith from Shia sources that companions were asking the Prophet, who’re these ulil amri, whose obedience is joined with the obedience to the Prophet while none is recorded in Sunni hadith.

Now were the Shias concocting hadiths or the Sunnis suppressing them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Salam,

When eThErEal is talking, we need to question his understanding (not his intention, because I know his intention is good).  His always looking from "spiritual" side...the heart.

I begin with this statement,

"Actions are good if it comes from the heart with good intention.  Good intention will remain good if it complies with the Command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)".

 

Case 1:

Iblis was good servant of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) for thousands of years and he wanted to retain his special status as servant of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forever.  He wanted to serve Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) DIRECTLY with no other option (not through leadership of someone).  When Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) raised the status of Adam (عليه السلام) and asked Angels and Iblis to sujud to Adam (عليه السلام), Iblis(la)rebelled.  Iblis intention was good because he wanted to serve Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) directly, but his violated the Command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  Iblis never repented (even though he has 500 years to do it).  Then Iblis turns into Syaitan (la).

 

Case 2:

Adam was asked not to eat the fruit from the tree.  Adam eaten because he wanted to serve Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forever (believing that the fruit will make him live forever), and his intention was good but he violated the Command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  He repented and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) made him a Prophet (عليه السلام).

 

Case 3:

For the so-called high level Sahabas, let take one example:

Umar  prevented the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) from writing a Will and according to eTHeErEal, this is because he couldn’t bear to see the Prophet (S) undergo any more difficulty and hardship.  Therefore, Umar's intention was good.  Why we need to see otherwise??

Well, let see what the Command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) on the issue on obeying the commands and instructions of the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)).

[Yusufali 33:36] It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.

[Yusufali 4:79] Whatever good, (O man!) happens to thee, is from Allah; but whatever evil happens to thee, is from thy (own) soul. and We have sent thee as a messenger to (instruct) mankind. And enough is Allah for a witness.
[Yusufali 4:80] He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah: But if any turn away, We have not sent thee to watch over their (evil deeds).

Our Prophet (saas) states in one hadith: "Avoid that which I forbid you to do and do that which I command you to do to the best of your capacity." (Sahih Muslim, book 30, hadith no. 5818)

 

For those who follow the path of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), "not following the commands or instructions from the Messenger ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) is crossing redline", unless those who rebelled made Taubah, just like Adam (عليه السلام) or otherwise they will follow the footstep of evils (Iblis laknatullah alai).

We can judge the actions and intention of anyone based on the clear commands from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  Otherwise human beings can get away from crimes or sins just by saying "I have good intention".  Many politicians use this excuses to manipulate general public.

In Surah Al-Fatiha we are commanded to be in the RIGHT PATH, and the right path is the Path of Rasul ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) and Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام).  There real reason is because Rasul ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) and Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) are with the Qur'an (with 100% under the Command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)).

 

Wallahualam.

ps: 

Hitler has very good intention to serve the German people, but his actions...

Natanyahoo has very good intention to serve Israelis, but his actions..

Many criminals have good intention when they did crimes...but failed to understand the actions

Trump have good intention to make America great again, but his actions...

Actions that do not comply with the Truth and Commands of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) are useless.

Edited by layman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@eThErEaL Lady Fatima, peace and blessings be upon her, died angry with Abu Bakr, and told the people to not reveal where she would be buried. She is one of the only people whose grave location is not known. This is both in Sunni and Shia hadiths.

So what's the matter with those who say "why are you against Abu Bakr"? We are only angry with those whom our blessed Lady Zahra, peace and blessings be upon her, was angry with. She was angry with Abu Bakr when she died, so we are also angry with him for the same reasons, namely that he betrayed the Holy Prophet (S) after his departure. 

How sad for those who were born Shia and then fell out from the ship of salvation so as to love the enemies of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). How will they face lady Zahra (عليه السلام) on the day of judgment after having praised her oppressors? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 12/3/2019 at 11:18 AM, eThErEaL said:

disrespect the Umar (رضي الله عنه) a

The same person who refused to give Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) a pen and paper before his final moments. Just read up the narrations even in Sunni books.

Edited by notme
Cursing Sunni revered person
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kaya said:

@eThErEaL Lady Fatima, peace and blessings be upon her, died angry with Abu Bakr, and told the people to not reveal where she would be buried. She is one of the only people whose grave location is not known. This is both in Sunni and Shia hadiths.

I don’t believe that she (عليه السلام) wanted to die in an unknown place.  I believe as the most of the Ahlul Sunnah wal Jamah believe that she (عليه السلام) was buried in Jannatul Baqi.  So, the idea that she was buried in obscurity is a conspiracy in my view.  

Quote

So what's the matter with those who say "why are you against Abu Bakr"? We are only angry with those whom our blessed Lady Zahra, peace and blessings be upon her, was angry with. She was angry with Abu Bakr when she died, so we are also angry with him for the same reasons, namely that he betrayed the Holy Prophet (S) after his departure. 

No.  This is not true.  It’s a lie.

Quote

How sad for those who were born Shia and then fell out from the ship of salvation so as to love the enemies of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). How will they face lady Zahra (عليه السلام) on the day of judgment after having praised her oppressors? 

I feel even closer to Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام).  Closer to the Prophet (S) closer to Allah.

I feel that God is guiding me and showing me the correct path.  I am unworthy of anything and yet God is favoring me I feel.  I didn’t do anything to deserve any of this and yet I have been given a lot of Iman from Him.  May God continue to give me more and more Iman and Certitude and May He give all of you more Iman (inshallah).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

Once Imam Ali (عليه السلام) (Even as a Caliph) lost a court case over an item that was stolen from him just because there weren’t sufficient witnesses to prove his case.  He accepted the judgement of the judge as God’s will and would have in fact reprimanded the judge if the judge simply took Imam Ali (عليه السلام) side for being an Imam or Kaliph.

I am aware of that.

So what is your point.

On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

The grief Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) caused was inevitable since he (in the capacity of a judge and caliph) was being strict (as was expected) and was doing his job.    I am not saying Fadak was not Seyyeda Fatima(عليه السلام) right, it truly belonged to her and it was her right to have Fadak.  

You seem to be unaware that Lady Fatima ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) had effectively rejected his point that Prophets do no pass on their belongings to their children.

Which means only one of two things:

He had invented that hadith or

He was having a serious lapse of memory.

Which further means that he was not doing his job properly.

On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

this is because he couldn’t bear to see the Prophet (S) undergo any more difficulty And hardship. 

That may have been a possibility.

The other possibility is that he knew exactly what the Prophet had in mind and was desperate to see that he did everything in his power to prevent it.

The latter has a greater chance of being true, considering that he rushed to Saqifa, even before the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) had been buried. 

The two things tie up in the conclusion that he wanted Imam Ali out of the race.

On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

We hope that by merely being associated with the Prophet (S) by being in his Ummah we will receive the Prophet’s (S) intercession on the day of Judgement despite our mistakes and vices. (Inshallah)

You can hope as much as you like but that is totally untrue.

There is a famous hadith accepted by both Sunnis and Shias that when some of his Companions will be led to hell, the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) will exclaim "But these are my companions." And he will be told "Yes, but you have no idea what they did after you were gone."

On 12/3/2019 at 10:18 AM, eThErEaL said:
On 12/3/2019 at 6:59 AM, eThErEaL said:

And yet, Imam Hasan And Imam Hussein (عليه السلام) were ordered by Imam Ali (عليه السلام) to defend his life from those that wanted to attack him.  

That was their Sharafat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2019 at 8:15 PM, ali_fatheroforphans said:

Our sect is not based on our personal misguided "feelings". Christians feel they are guided, Hindus feel they are guided, Sufis feel they are guided. We all feel closer to God etc.

The fact is that the love of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) can't fill your heart without you having hatred for the enemies of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). If you feel it works that way then it's an illusion. 

If you don’t see those companions as enemies....    it is not an illusion.  

By the way, I was responding to someone who said:  “ how sad...”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, baqar said:

I am aware of that.

So what is your point.

You seem to be unaware that Lady Fatima ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) had effectively rejected his point that Prophets do no pass on their belongings to their children.

Which means only one of two things:

He had invented that hadith or

He was having a serious lapse of memory.

Which further means that he was not doing his job properly.

the Unfortunate situation was that the witnesses did not suffice as they were part of the family.

5 hours ago, baqar said:

That may have been a possibility.

good.  

5 hours ago, baqar said:

The other possibility is that he knew exactly what the Prophet had in mind and was desperate to see that he did everything in his power to prevent it.
 

This interpretation is based on “su as zhan” (having a bad opinion).  It is your choice to have either a good opinion or a bad opinion.  

5 hours ago, baqar said:

The latter has a greater chance of being true, considering that he rushed to Saqifa, even before the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) had been buried. 

Even Saqifah can be interpreted positively.  It need not be interpreted negatively.  I for example see it positively as Abu Bakr and Umar trying to prevent discord in the unmah between The Aws and Khazraj.  Someone really needed to be there and Alhamdulillah, thank God those two were there!  When I read history on this I cannot help but think that Umar and Abu Bakr has the interest of the Prophet’s (S) Ummah at heart.

5 hours ago, baqar said:

The two things tie up in the conclusion that he wanted Imam Ali out of the race.

I don’t see this conclusion at all.  Yes he wasn’t in favor for sure.  But he wasn’t in favor for good reasons.. precisely because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was just too great and too pure for the Ummah to handle.  It would be miraculous to lead in such a way while holding the entire Ummah together (but this miracle is only possible with the inception of divine revelation, namely the Prophetic Mission - where Heaven meets Earth).  Notice that when Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was given a chance to lead, how many civil wars there were?  Now as time goes on the Earth becomes farther from Heaven (which was the meeting point where revelation occurred which means the possibility of a pure leader becomes even more impossible ) This is truly the reason why Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) decided to let go of the leadership. 

5 hours ago, baqar said:

You can hope as much as you like but that is totally untrue.

it is true.  This is how the Prophet (S) grants shafah, not through our own efforts but by being part of his (S) Ummah.  Falling under his banner of praise.  Inshallah.  This element Of love for the Prophet (S) is missing in The consciousness of most Shias today.  And this is unfortunate.

5 hours ago, baqar said:

There is a famous hadith accepted by both Sunnis and Shias that when some of his Companions will be led to hell, the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) will exclaim "But these are my companions." And he will be told "Yes, but you have no idea what they did after you were gone."

there are also many Hadith that say the Prophet (S) will intercede for everyone in his Ummah.  

5 hours ago, baqar said:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

the Unfortunate situation was that the witnesses did not suffice as they were part of the family.

Which law in Islam precludes family members from acting as witnesses?

3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

This interpretation is based on “su as zhan” (having a bad opinion).  It is your choice to have either a good opinion or a bad opinion.  

My choice is irrelevant.

The priority is to find  out what the truth is and everything points to the very high probability that Umar had a good idea what the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) had in mind. 

And it wasn't to his liking.

3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

Even Saqifah can be interpreted positively.  

Saqifa must be interpreted according to people's intentions.

To leave the Prophet's funeral to go to a meeting shows the participants' real intentions.

3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

I don’t see this conclusion at all.

I do.

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...