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
Alireza Yasini

Why is it that Sunnis think that Abu Bakr should been the leader?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, AmirioTheMuzzy said:

@eThErEaL If you believe in Immamate, then by their own criteria, you are in no way part of "Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamah".

You live in a box.  So, I would expect you to say that.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


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

You live in a box.  So, I would expect you to say that.  

You live in a box, that's why you feel the need to not identify yourself as a Shia (you don't approve of the way it is currently being practiced by most).

You're whole argument goes against the reality of your situation... In what way are you Sunni in beliefs? Also, the "ahlul sunnah wa jamah" term you are espousing is meant to be exclusionary. (It's meant to separate all Sunnis [Madhhabi, Salafi, Sufi] from Shias and our belief in Immamate)

Share this post


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

You live in a box, that's why you feel the need to not identify yourself as a Shia (you don't approve of the way it is currently being practiced by most).

You're whole argument goes against the reality of your situation... In what way are you Sunni in beliefs? Also, the "ahlul sunnah wa jamah" term you are espousing is meant to be exclusionary. (It's meant to separate all Sunnis [Madhhabi, Salafi, Sufi] from Shias and our belief in Immamate)

Dear Brother,  

I don’t have a problem with Shiaism per se.  Shiaism per se is hardly lived.  It is so rare to find true Shia because true Shiaism is connected with the Imams.  There is a disconnect now.  The proof of connection to the Imam will be in the overwhelming amount of men who have presence of heart. When you look at them you are reminded of God.  Instead of this you find an arrogance among Shias, especially amongst those who think they have knowledge, it is all a deception.  It is fake to the core.  They have nothing.  They only have a useless shell and useless name.   They know Nothing of the Imams.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

Dear Brother,  

I don’t have a problem with Shiaism per se.  Shiaism per se is hardly lived.  It is so rare to find true Shia because true Shiaism is connected with the Imams.  There is a disconnect now.  The proof of connection to the Imam will be in the overwhelming amount of men who have presence of heart. When you look at them you are reminded of God.  Instead of this you find an arrogance among Shias, especially amongst those who think they have knowledge, it is all a deception.  It is fake to the core.  They have nothing.  They only have a useless shell and useless name.   They know Nothing of the Imams.  

How is this an argument for Sunnism over Shiism though?

Edit: On a second thought, please don't reply. I don't have time to go in circles with this all day. No offense. 

Edited by AmirioTheMuzzy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

Instead of this you find an arrogance among Shias, especially amongst those who think they have knowledge, it is all a deception.  It is fake to the core.  They have nothing.  They only have a useless

Brother, I believe the 'arrogance' and 'think you have the knowledge' talk has clearly been evident in the posts of none other than yourself during the past several months. It's not the 'Shias' here who keep trying to 'enlighten' you with their over the top sense of reality and 'ONNESS'. Nor have they been trying to provoke you by cursing a 'caliph' whilst you happily praised Muawaya. 

And by the way Brother, true Ahlul Sunnah of Rasoolullah saw are the followers of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) because only they (عليه السلام) continued his Sunnah. Regardless of what others who follow their own versions of 'Sunnah' like to call themselves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, AmirioTheMuzzy said:

How is this an argument for Sunnism over Shiism though?

Edit: On a second thought, please don't reply. I don't have time to go in circles with this all day. No offense. 

Offense not taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

Dear Brother,  

I don’t have a problem with Shiaism per se.  Shiaism per se is hardly lived.  It is so rare to find true Shia because true Shiaism is connected with the Imams.  There is a disconnect now.  The proof of connection to the Imam will be in the overwhelming amount of men who have presence of heart. When you look at them you are reminded of God.  Instead of this you find an arrogance among Shias, especially amongst those who think they have knowledge, it is all a deception.  It is fake to the core.  They have nothing.  They only have a useless shell and useless name.   They know Nothing of the Imams.  

Ouch. 

Brother @eThErEaL can choose to define himself as what he likes, I don't think this should be the subject of endless posts and debates. It is his choice at the end of the day.

What would be more beneficial is to take an honest look at the post above which is a critique of the shi'I community rather than the Imami beliefs.

More importantly, refer to the khutba of Hammam, or muttaqeen, in nahjul balagha. Refer to the narration where Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) defines and describes the shi'a. Refer to suratul mu'minoon and suratul insaan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Imam Ali had close companions named Umar and Uthman [ Umar b abi salma and Uthman b huneyf ]

but which close companion of Imam was called " Abu Bakr" ?

maybe son of Abubakr , Muhammad b. Abi Bakr because close companions of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) were close companions of Prophet Muhammad (pbu) that some of them changed their names & titles after converting to Islam that Abu Bakr means father of Bakr but specially used for first caliph but it's possible that some of companions had same title like him but it cleared from history in favor of first caliph to make his title unique among other caliphs but some companions of other Imams such as Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) had title or name of Abubakr such as Abubakr ibn Muhammad also it said in some sources that his name was Abdullah but because banning of using Prophet name by second caliph people stated to call him Abu Bakr.

http://en.wikishia.net/view/Muhammad_b._Abi_Bakr

https://valiasr-aj.com/persian/mobile_shownews.php?idnews=5137

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2020 at 2:39 PM, eThErEaL said:

So, since Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) was a human being, and since all human beings are vicegerents of God, Abu Bakr was a vicegerent of God as well.

:) Lets take the help of Qur'an to understand what & who is vicegerent. 

وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً ۖ قَالُوا أَتَجْعَلُ فِيهَا مَنْ يُفْسِدُ فِيهَا وَيَسْفِكُ الدِّمَاءَ وَنَحْنُ نُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِكَ وَنُقَدِّسُ لَكَ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ 
وَعَلَّمَ آدَمَ الْأَسْمَاءَ كُلَّهَا ثُمَّ عَرَضَهُمْ عَلَى الْمَلَائِكَةِ فَقَالَ أَنْبِئُونِي بِأَسْمَاءِ هَٰؤُلَاءِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ
قَالُوا سُبْحَانَكَ لَا عِلْمَ لَنَا إِلَّا مَا عَلَّمْتَنَا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ
قَالَ يَا آدَمُ أَنْبِئْهُمْ بِأَسْمَائِهِمْ ۖ فَلَمَّا أَنْبَأَهُمْ بِأَسْمَائِهِمْ قَالَ أَلَمْ أَقُلْ لَكُمْ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ غَيْبَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا تُبْدُونَ وَمَا كُنْتُمْ تَكْتُمُونَ 

2:30-33) When your Lord said to the angles, ‘Indeed I am going to set a viceroy on the Earth,’ they said, ‘Will You set in it someone who will cause corruption in it, and shed blood, while we celebrate Your praise and proclaim Your sanctity?’ He said ‘Indeed I know what you do not know.’ And He taught Adam the Names, all of them; then presented them to the angles and said, Tell me the names of these, if you are truthful.’ They said, Immaculate are You! We have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed You are the All-knowing, the All-wise.’ He said ‘O Adam, inform them of their names,’ and when he had informed them of their names, He said ‘Did I not tell you that I indeed know the Unseen in the heaven and the Earth, and that I know whatever you disclose and whatever you were concealing?

 

Quote

KHALIFA

The literal meaning of khalaf is to come after, follow, succeed etc. In this verse it has been used in the sense of succeeding, in fact, representing Allah on the Earth, to exercise His authority in terms of "reacting" to His will, as His vicegerent. This is the basis of Prophet-hood. Some schools of thought hold the view that reason and intellect, at the disposal of man, are enough to represent Allah, and there is no need of the delegation of authority. In this verse however the necessity of a vicegerent of Allah on the Earth has been conclusively proved, appointment of whom cannot and shall not be made by any one save Allah. Khalifatullah, the representative of Allah, is he whom Allah Himself delegates His authority.

These are they whom We gave the book and the authority and the prophethood;

These are they whom Allah has guided, so, follow their guidance;

(AN-AM 89 and 90)

Neither the consensus of public opinion, nor a group, nor an individual has the right to represent the will of Allah. Even the Prophets or the angels did not have the right to say anything in the matter of appointment of the khalifa. Allah does not allow any one to interfere with the execution of His will, nor can any one question Him. Here and in many other places, dealing with the delegation of authority, it has been asserted that His will and choice is not arbitrary but is always based on the recognition of merit. Adam was appointed as His vicegerent, in preference to the angels, on the merit of possessing the knowledge which they did not have.

As per your logic, the son of Prophet Noah (عليه السلام) was vicegerent of Allah because he was the son of Adam (عليه السلام) & So do Abu Jahal & Abu Lahab. But the verses of Qur'an proves you wrong, you need to show the merit of Abu Bakr, where is his knowledge? Perhaps the following would give you a brilliant picture of his knowledge:

“Abu Bakr Once looked at a bird on a tree, then said, Well done bird … You eat the fruits, you stand on the trees and you are not accountable to anybody nor indeed can anybody punish you. I wish I was a tree by the road, and that a camel would come along and eat me. then relieve me with his <<bowel evacuation>> … I wish that I had been all that, rather than a human being.

[Tarikh al-Tabari Page 41]
[Al-Riyadh Al-Nadira, Vol 1 Page 134]
[Kanz al Ummal, Page 361]
[Minhaj as Sunnah, Ibn Taymiyya, Vol 3 Page 120]

 

On 1/27/2020 at 2:39 PM, eThErEaL said:

 Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) became a leaders of the Muslims because of the events that had transpired in Saqifa.

And we know very well what happened there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Logic1234 said:

:) Lets take the help of Qur'an to understand what & who is vicegerent. 

وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً ۖ قَالُوا أَتَجْعَلُ فِيهَا مَنْ يُفْسِدُ فِيهَا وَيَسْفِكُ الدِّمَاءَ وَنَحْنُ نُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِكَ وَنُقَدِّسُ لَكَ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ 
وَعَلَّمَ آدَمَ الْأَسْمَاءَ كُلَّهَا ثُمَّ عَرَضَهُمْ عَلَى الْمَلَائِكَةِ فَقَالَ أَنْبِئُونِي بِأَسْمَاءِ هَٰؤُلَاءِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ
قَالُوا سُبْحَانَكَ لَا عِلْمَ لَنَا إِلَّا مَا عَلَّمْتَنَا ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْعَلِيمُ الْحَكِيمُ
قَالَ يَا آدَمُ أَنْبِئْهُمْ بِأَسْمَائِهِمْ ۖ فَلَمَّا أَنْبَأَهُمْ بِأَسْمَائِهِمْ قَالَ أَلَمْ أَقُلْ لَكُمْ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ غَيْبَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا تُبْدُونَ وَمَا كُنْتُمْ تَكْتُمُونَ 

2:30-33) When your Lord said to the angles, ‘Indeed I am going to set a viceroy on the Earth,’ they said, ‘Will You set in it someone who will cause corruption in it, and shed blood, while we celebrate Your praise and proclaim Your sanctity?’ He said ‘Indeed I know what you do not know.’ And He taught Adam the Names, all of them; then presented them to the angles and said, Tell me the names of these, if you are truthful.’ They said, Immaculate are You! We have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed You are the All-knowing, the All-wise.’ He said ‘O Adam, inform them of their names,’ and when he had informed them of their names, He said ‘Did I not tell you that I indeed know the Unseen in the heaven and the Earth, and that I know whatever you disclose and whatever you were concealing?

 

As per your logic, the son of Prophet Noah (عليه السلام) was vicegerent of Allah because he was the son of Adam (عليه السلام) & So do Abu Jahal & Abu Lahab. But the verses of Qur'an proves you wrong, you need to show the merit of Abu Bakr, where is his knowledge? Perhaps the following would give you a brilliant picture of his knowledge:

“Abu Bakr Once looked at a bird on a tree, then said, Well done bird … You eat the fruits, you stand on the trees and you are not accountable to anybody nor indeed can anybody punish you. I wish I was a tree by the road, and that a camel would come along and eat me. then relieve me with his <<bowel evacuation>> … I wish that I had been all that, rather than a human being.

[Tarikh al-Tabari Page 41]
[Al-Riyadh Al-Nadira, Vol 1 Page 134]
[Kanz al Ummal, Page 361]
[Minhaj as Sunnah, Ibn Taymiyya, Vol 3 Page 120]

 

And we know very well what happened there. 

I see Donald Trump is a khalifutallah as well.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


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

I see Donald Trump is a khalifutallah as well.  

Well, I view him as Ayatullah Donald Trump instead of Khalifatullah. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

Well, I view him as Ayatullah Donald Trump instead of Khalifatullah. 

 

That works too.

but in all seriousness.  You and I are also khalifatullah.  This is why the angels knew the implications of bloodshed and corruption relative to .  .  their knowledge.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


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

That works too.

With a lot of twisting of arms you can make him anything but not the khalifatullah. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

With a lot of twisting of arms you can make him anything but not the khalifatullah. 

Every human is khalifatullah.yhis is why the angels talked about corruption and bloodshed relative to their knowledge before being taught “all the names”.

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eThErEaL said:

Every human is khalifatullah.

Not in the sense we are discussing..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eThErEaL said:

Then perhaps Specify what sense.  

 Khalifatullah, the representative of Allah, is he whom Allah Himself delegates His authority. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

 Khalifatullah, the representative of Allah, is he whom Allah Himself delegates His authority. 

 

And this is everyone. We all have a responsibility on this Earth. We have been given this authority by God. We can either display more wrath than mercy or more mercy than wrath.  Either way we are His representatives manifesting His names and attributes.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


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

And this is everyone. We all have a responsibility on this Earth. We have been given this authority by God.

Ok, Khalifatullah Noah (عليه السلام) build the ark according to the commands of God & before His eyes while Khalifatullah Son of Noah refused to get into that ark and got drowned. 

How many Khalifatullah were given the book & the wisdom and were "appointed" as teachers? How many were given the authority that they bring the dead back to life, that they understand the languages of all creatures, that the mountains & birds sings the tasbih with them? 

Edited by Logic1234

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2020 at 4:15 AM, Alireza Yasini said:

BUT WHY WOULD HE NAME ONE OF HIS SON Abu Bakr.

There were a people in family of Ahlulbait who were named Umar or other different names which were similar to people who apposed Imam Ali or others in the past.

It had nothing to do with others having similar name and more to do with what names signified. 

Also Abu Bakr isn't a name it's a kunya in Arabic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hassu93 said:

There were a people in family of Ahlulbait who were named Umar or other different names which were similar to people who apposed Imam Ali or others in the past.

It had nothing to do with others having similar name and more to do with what names signified. 

Also Abu Bakr isn't a name it's a kunya in Arabic.

I don’t find this convincing.  Honestly.  The last thing one would do is name any of his or her children the same name as the one who supposedly is a hypocrite or Who directly oppressed me and my family.  
 

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) protected Umar Ibn Al-Khattab when he was a caliph, by advising him sincerely that he should not go in the front lines of battle for the Ummah needed the caliph alive.  Why would Imam Ali (عليه السلام) think it is beneficial for Umar (who supposedly is not supposed to be a caliph) to continue being a caliph?  This is incident is taught to Shias in Madressa— it is part of their madressa curriculum.   Then Imam Ali (عليه السلام) gave his daughter in marriage to Umar.  (Which Shias will deny..)
frankly, the way I see all this is that Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) and Umar (رضي الله عنه) and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) we’re all part of one BIG FAMILY.  And in a family there are naturally sometimes arguments and quarrels between siblings and cousins, but at the end of the day, it’s all family!  
 

when you are unbiased you come to realize, hmm yes, maybe Shias and Sunnis who argue a lot are giving an unnecessary amount of weight to the significance of the Historical Caliphate of Islam.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Logic1234 said:

Ok, Khalifatullah Noah (عليه السلام) build the ark according to the commands of God & before His eyes while Khalifatullah Son of Noah refused to get into that ark and got drowned. 

How many Khalifatullah were given the book & the wisdom and were "appointed" as teachers? How many were given the authority that they bring the dead back to life, that they understand the languages of all creatures, that the mountains & birds sings the tasbih with them? 

The traditions say: There were 124,000 Prophet.  313 of which were messengers and.  5 of which were ulul-azm. 
 

And...?

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


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

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) protected Umar Ibn Al-Khattab when he was a caliph,

Ofcourse, he did because Ali(عليه السلام) was the Imam of Umar.  Just like Imam Zain Al abideen (عليه السلام) protected the yezidi man in his house when he was running for his life (I'm sure people are aware of that incident). 

Imam Zain (عليه السلام) did say to the yezidi that whether he accepts it or not, he is the yezidi's Imam and since he had called for help, it was wajib for the Imam to help him. 

Similarly Imam Ali (عليه السلام) helped and protected Umar not because he approved his actions, but because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was the actual leader of Islam who had to safeguard Islam in whatever way he could, even if it meant helping Umar. 

If a pilot hijacks a plane and tries to fly it himself and the plane is about to crash, the actual pilot will then help the hijacker and guide him how to flow because he knows he is the real pilot. This doesn't mean the pilot is supporting the hijacker, he is only protecting the plane with all its passengers, despite being totally against the hijacker. That is the relationship of Ali (عليه السلام) and Umar, where Umar hijacked Islam. 

Share this post


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

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) protected Umar Ibn Al-Khattab when he was a caliph, by advising him sincerely that he should not go in the front lines of battle for the Ummah needed the caliph alive.  Why would Imam Ali (عليه السلام) think it is beneficial for Umar (who supposedly is not supposed to be a caliph) to continue being a caliph?  This is incident is taught to Shias in Madressa— it is part of their madressa curriculum

Just like Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was sent among deviant people to guide them, and Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) benefitted those mushriks in many ways since he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) made many of those Muslims and guided
them with true teachings of Allah Almighty.
That doesn't prove he liked Mushriks, but it proves that he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) gave right advice to everyone, whether his enemy or enemy of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)

Share this post


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

don’t find this convincing.  Honestly.  The last thing one would do is name any of his or her children the same name as the one who supposedly is a hypocrite or Who directly oppressed me and my family.

There have been others with same names.
I don’t know much but some like Usman to whom Imam Ali (عليه السلام) wrote letters in Nahaj-ul-balagha and he was his follower
Abu Bakr isn't a name
And same goes for Umar.

There was also Yazid named sahabi of Imam Hussein (عليه السلام),
but today, after 1000 years, we avoid such names due to persons
who ever famous for their evil deeds
If we don't name our children yazeed, doesn't mean we hate Yazid who supported
Imam Hussein (عليه السلام)

Share this post


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

That works too.

but in all seriousness.  You and I are also khalifatullah.  This is why the angels knew the implications of bloodshed and corruption relative to .  .  their knowledge.  

When angles spoke about corruption and bloodshed, Allah denied their argument in the same verse
and context of other verses after it says that Adam (عليه السلام) was refered to as caliph

There is a nas, that Allah choosed him (Adam (عليه السلام))
If you are kahlifatullah, you should have some proof for that.

You cannot get orders from Allah almighty
If you are khalifatullah, ask Allah to send down some sign to show us which path is true path
we can expect such mojaza from khalifatullah since you are representating Allah on Earth

Share this post


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

And this is everyone. We all have a responsibility on this Earth. We have been given this authority by God. We can either display more wrath than mercy or more mercy than wrath.  Either way we are His representatives manifesting His names and attributes.  

you are your fathers caliph
you carry duty of your father
you represent your father
and in this chain, all humans are caliphs
they have reponsibilities with respect to their position
its your duty to take care of your young siblings
but it isn't your duty to take care of siblings of some random person

Caliph of Allah has duty to guide people
since he is representing Allah on Earth (not father)

you have authority over things that your father left, your family etc

Caliph of Allah has authority over things, that Allah has given him, guidance for people, and having right to be followed etc

You can’t compare them actually

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

This is rude behavior.  Just letting you know.  

Salam,

I apologize for the rude behaviour, maybe I shouldn't have started off with that tone

 

17 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

God chooses people.  And Imam Ali (عليه السلام) is an Imam from eternity.  And yes I am Sunni.  And because I am of Ahlul Sunnah wal Jamah this is why I am A Shia of Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

Did God choose Abu Bakr to be caliph? 

Being a part of ahlul sunnah wal jama3ah whilst claiming to be Shia of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) is quite misleading. If you claim yourself to be a Sunni, that means you respect people like Muawiyah. I mean I don't know if you do but I was reading somewhere where this Sunni sheikh claimed that Muawiyah was one of the rightly guided caliphs and the 12 caliphs that Prophet Muhammad (sawas) mentioned. 

And if you claim to be Shia of Imam Ali (عليه السلام), then that means belief in Imamate.

17 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

it requires understanding from the heart.  Not beliefs and dogma of a cult.

This is illogical. Belief from the heart? People have different thoughts and interpret things differently in many ways. So you're saying that interpretation of these ahadith are useless because you only believe what your heart tells you. 

17 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

You are veiled and imprisoned without you realizing it by the deceptive knowledge (Shubuhat) that has been fed into you all these years.  You are already assuming so many things about me that it has become impossible to even discuss anything with you.

Again I apologise for making assumptions like that, but my intention was that it is a general thing that Sunnis believe the word mawla to mean friend instead of master, such as during the sermon of Ghadir Khumm.

 

17 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

Because I am not a dogmatic cult follower.   This might sound bizarre to most of you.  My religion is not a religion of dogmatic beliefs and blind reasoning.  My religion, inshallah, is that  tasted and experienced.  I know the truth when I experience it.  I don’t know the truth by mere conceptualizations and rationalizations.  One can rationalize anything.  Even People who lack faith can be the best in rationalizing their lack of faith.

This has got nothing to do with cult. It involves pure evidence from both the Qur'an and the Sunnah of our Holy Messenger (sawas).

 

17 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

you asked me For my proof.  My proof is for me and me alone.  My proof is my experience.  My experience of a tree that does not yield good fruit is proof that the tree is decayed.  I see the communities are dead.  The tree is therefore dead.

Elaborate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

I know the truth when I experience it.  I don’t know the truth by mere conceptualizations and rationalizations.

Anecdotal instances caused you to become Sunni, this is basically your entire ordeal in a nutshell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2020 at 12:45 AM, Alireza Yasini said:

And did Abu Bakr claimed that he should be the leader?

in 'then I was guided' there's this reference attributed to be from sahih Bukhari.

it talks about Umar & Abu Bakr & them having their last words on death beds( when certainty of death smells) saying things like they wished that Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) would have given them life as a tree or its branches and be eaten by animals than having to face the consequences of what they did.

When am @ a place with Bukhari, it turns out I don't have the reference & vice versa.

Can anyone verify from Bukhari via 'then I was guided'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Mohammad313Ali said:

Anecdotal instances caused you to become Sunni, this is basically your entire ordeal in a nutshell.

Why do people convert?  Because of the Space and atmosphere wherein one thrives.  If you notice I am not condemning Shiasm per se.  I am not saying Shiaism as such is misguided.  I am saying that Shiaism, to a large extent, in its current manifestation, appears to be unorthodox Islam.  

Share this post


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

Salam,

I apologize for the rude behaviour, maybe I shouldn't have started off with that tone

apology accepted.

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Did God choose Abu Bakr to be caliph? 

No.  Any educated Sunni should tell you this.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Being a part of ahlul sunnah wal jama3ah whilst claiming to be Shia of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) is quite misleading.

I don’t think so. 

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

If you claim yourself to be a Sunni, that means you respect people like Muawiyah.

yes I respect Muawiyyah (not for who he is but for his association with the noble Prophet (S)), but I condemn his actions of fighting and going against Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

I mean I don't know if you do but I was reading somewhere where this Sunni sheikh claimed that Muawiyah was one of the rightly guided caliphs and the 12 caliphs that Prophet Muhammad (sawas) mentioned. 

I believe the consensus is that there are only 4 rightly guided caliphs and sometime Sunnis add Umar Ibn Abd Al-Aziz (if I recall correctly).  But all Sunnis condemn the actions of Muawiyyah and Ayesha.

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

 


 

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

And if you claim to be Shia of Imam Ali (عليه السلام), then that means belief in Imamate.

it depends what you mean by Imamat.  I do believe in Imamat, certainly.... but my definition of it is a little more encompassing and broader.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

This is illogical. Belief from the heart? People have different thoughts and interpret things differently in many ways. So you're saying that interpretation of these ahadith are useless because you only believe what your heart tells you. 
 

yes.  It is all about ones heart.  I listen to my heart not my mind, inshallah.  I can feel the Prophet (S) presence in some places and not so much in others.  I go where the Prophet (S) is, inshallah. 

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Again I apologise for making assumptions like that, but my intention was that it is a general thing that Sunnis believe the word mawla to mean friend instead of master, such as during the sermon of Ghadir Khumm.

That’s alright.  So, Sunnis Tend to be really bad in polemical arguments in case you didn’t notice.  But I actually admire that because a religion is not essentially polemical it only accidentally polemical.  A religion in being unique will necessarily, at some point, be compared to another religion.  But the religions at their core, of they are all still alive will not be polemical but rather will only facilitate God Consciousness (marifa) and the practice of Virtue (detachment, vigilance, contentment, and loving-compassion)  The moment the followers of a religion lose interest in this and make it all about their respective dogmas or theologies, there is a red flag that something isn’t right.  This applies to all religions.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

 

This has got nothing to do with cult. It involves pure evidence from both the Qur'an and the Sunnah of our Holy Messenger (sawas).

Evidence is in the heart dear brother / sister.  It can be sensed in the air around you.  Even if you use history (and history has its benefits, in a relative sort of way, don’t) but even if you rely on history, history itself (at the end of the day) is not objectively true.  The only objective reality is God Himself.  

1 hour ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

Why do people convert?  Because of the Space and atmosphere wherein one thrives.  If you notice I am not condemning Shiasm per se.  I am not saying Shiaism as such is misguided.  I am saying that Shiaism, to a large extent, in its current manifestation, appears to be unorthodox Islam.  

No brother you need to understand the difference between “Shiaism” and “Followers of Shiaism”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@eThErEaL Allah is pleased with the one who angered Al-Zahra? Or the one who attacked Al-Zahra?

You’re being very evasive for whenever a question is posed to you in regards to creed you dismiss it as a mere polemical or dogmatic issue.

To follow a sect, religion, or faith based on one’s own “spiritual enlightenment”, inclination, or fondness of its adherents is complete hypocrisy.

What then is our case against Christians when they follow Jesus as the son of God due to the spiritual and kindhearted nature of the Church, clergyman, it’s adherents, and we mustn’t forget “the spiritual presence of Jesus” in their hearts.

A preposterous means in gaining insight to the way of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), however all you have stated is in complete conformity and accordance to such measure, merely replace Jesus with Muhammad (ص), church with mosque, and clergyman with Sheikhs.

Brother if you don’t give us a clear cut reason pertaining to creed as to why Ahlul-Sunnah are a school of thought which is more in accordance to the teachings of the Prophet and the will of Allah, then there is no room for discussion at all.

you are simply complaining from a lack of spiritual connection within Shia centers and that is completely and utterly the fault of those who have neglected the correct means of propagating and projecting the faith of Ale-Muhammad. 

Although I applaud you for exemplifying the Sunnah of the Shaykhayn by escaping any form of dialogue pertaining to creed and cowering behind The Commander of the faithful by simply stating “I am a Shia of Ali”, and then going on to spew whatever nonsensical jargon you may have.

Did Imam Ali Al-Reza also say “it’s all spiritual we don’t discuss polemical matters”, or did he instead silence all those who opposed the true, pure, Muhammadiyan Islam through objective and rational rebuttals, questions, and answers through the books of the Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, and whomsoever claimed to have a Hujjat against the Imam ((عليه السلام)).

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.


×
×
  • Create New...