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  
Kalepaceh

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

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I think the fear of Ahlul Sunnah is that if they call Muawiyah as munafiq, it will put into question Abu Bakr, Umar & Uthman as well because all of them have nurtured him as gave him important positions during their tenure of caliphates. 

They have to protect Muawiyah otherwise if they accept him as munafiq which is truly the case,  the only way left for them is to quit their Sunni ideology. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cool said:

I think the fear of Ahlul Sunnah is that if they call Muawiyah as munafiq, it will put into question Abu Bakr, Umar & Uthman as well because all of them have nurtured him as gave him important positions during their tenure of caliphates. 

They have to protect Muawiyah otherwise if they accept him as munafiq which is truly the case,  the only way left for them is to quit their Sunni ideology. 

This is a good point. In general, critically evaluating the actions of these individuals from saqifa onwards opens up the barrier that has been built to protect the institutions of that time. This is why adalat al sahaba is so strongly pushed and why questioning or evaluating early historical disputes is strongly discouraged by many of the ahlus sunnah. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Cool said:

These ahadith are from Bukhari & Muslim.

Narrated ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet said, “I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount”. ‘Abdullah added: The Prophet said, “I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and then they will be taken away from me and I will say, ‘O Lord, my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You do not know what they did after you had left.’
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8 Hadith 578

Right. If anything this proves the Sunnah stance of respecting all the Sahabah and leaving the judgement to God.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Cool said:

They declare few daeef, they keep quite on few and they simply mix up truth with falsehood by saying "we just respect all companions & say radi Allaho anh for them collectively". 

Yes we know many hypocrites were in the dress of companions and time as well as their own deeds have exposed them. This is the case of Muawiyah.

Do you agree with everything this Shia by the name “bladerunner” says?  He says some surprising things which I wish all you Shias can agree with.  Like he says:  it is wrong to call Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ayesha, Muawwiyah a Kafir. 


 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


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

I think the fear of Ahlul Sunnah is that if they call Muawiyah as munafiq, it will put into question Abu Bakr, Umar & Uthman as well because all of them have nurtured him as gave him important positions during their tenure of caliphates. 

They have to protect Muawiyah otherwise if they accept him as munafiq which is truly the case,  the only way left for them is to quit their Sunni ideology. 

The practice of calling those very close to the Prophet (S) as munafiq and disbeliever   is an insult to the Prophet (S).  There is no fear it is just insulting and it is foolish.  It is foolish because it reflects poorly on the Ummah of the Prophet (S).  The Prophet (S) said that his (S) Ummah is the best Ummah.  This is why Ahlul Sunnah cannot make sense of the Shia narrative.  
 

Having said this, 

we do criticize what is blameworthy and we praise what is praiseworthy.  We use our judgment where it counts.  

but we don’t go the extreme of labeling individuals a kafir, or a munafiq.  this is simply not our prerogative. 

We do believe God is Just.  We fear His Justice.  But there is a difference between knowing that God is Just and knowing “how” God is just.  We are not allowed to arrogate His justice.  Not only is there no benefit in doing so but it is arrogant.  
 

 

Share this post


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

This is a good point. In general, critically evaluating the actions of these individuals from saqifa onwards opens up the barrier that has been built to protect the institutions of that time. This is why adalat al sahaba is so strongly pushed and why questioning or evaluating early historical disputes is strongly discouraged by many of the ahlus sunnah. 

Evaluating their actions is not discouraged by Majority of Sunnis.  Majority of Sunnis agree that Muawiyyah and Ayesha were wrong to have done what they did.

But why feel so compelled to call someone a kafir or a hypocrite?  Perhaps due to your social conditioning and your Narrative?  Consider the possibility that the narrative you were brought up with may have been an exaggeration.  no one is saying we shouldn’t love the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام).  We should love them and exalt their status.  We should seek their intercession and pray that we should always be on their side.  Are you really on their side by calling Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Muawiyyah, and Ayesha kafirs and hypocrites?  
 

1) Would Imam Ali (عليه السلام) protect Uthman (Who you claim is a Usurper, a munafiq, a kafir, a fasiq) using Imam Hussein (عليه السلام)  and Imam Hassan (عليه السلام)

2) Would Imam Ali (عليه السلام) Advice a Umar (who you claim is a Usurper, a kafir, a Munafiq, a Fasiq) not to go to the front lines because the Ummah needs a caliph? 

3) Would Imam Ali (عليه السلام) have treated Ayesha with dignity and respect after battle of Jamal if she just committed the worst of sins and the most unforgivable act one can do that would classify her as a munafiq, a fasiq, and a kafir?

—-  I think we should use our discernment dear brother

Adalat is a Mutazilite influence.  It developed as a stance they took in answering Euthephro’s dilemma.  And all these theological positions, whether hambalite or Mutazilite are just theological disputes that arose once Islam interacted with the outside world.  These theological disputes were extrinsic to the lived reality of Islam.  The lived reality of a Islam was the attachment Muslims had towards the Prophet (S) via his spiritual heirs.  

Does calling Muawiyyah a hypcrite make your Salah better?  Does it make you more prayerful, more God conscious?  

it doesn’t!  In fact it is a distraction.  It hampers you by filling you up with hatred and anger.  And by no means is this hatred or anger holy or praiseworthy is it does not directly result in God consciousness and humility.  

 

 


 

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cool said:

Narrated ‘Abdullah: The Prophet said, “I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount”. ‘Abdullah added: The Prophet said, “I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and then they will be taken away from me and I will say, ‘O Lord, my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You do not know what they did after you had left.’ Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8 Hadith 578

I find it very difficult  to understand how Sunnis admire men who rejected the arguments of Lady Fatima (sa) when she put forward her claim to Fidak.

Abu Bakr quoted a hadith that says that Prophets leave nothing for their families and Lady Fatima (sa) produced evidence of Fidak having been given to her by her father. 

It is hard to believe that the Prophet would not have told his daughter whatever he told Abu Bakr.

So there are only two possibilities.

Either Abu Bakr invented that hadith  OR  the Prophet (sa) was so naive that he did not tell his daughter about it.

Personally, I doubt very much that he would tell Abu Bakr something that concerns his family and not tell his family about it.
And if that is so, Abu Bakr definitely invented that hadith.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 000 said:

Imam Ali's wisdom is too high for us too comprehend fully.
It's so high that it's really possible that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) named them such, just to teach us, after thousand and hundreds years, how to destroy our ego and sacrifice for the sake of unity.

Good point, brother

There is absolutely no evidence that he named any of his sons after any of the caliphs. 

Share this post


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

Good point, brother

There is absolutely no evidence that he named any of his sons after any of the caliphs. 

why did Imam Ali (عليه السلام) name his children: Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman?

Shia Answer: “these were common names at the time”

Response to Shias:

Yes, it is a common name at the time but those were not the ONLY common names at the time!  Why choose those common names and not others?  

Do you have any proof or evidence that he (عليه السلام) named them after those companions most Muslims have not heard so much about?  Were these companions fallible or infallible?  Obviously fallible...  why not choose Salman, Miqdad?  Abu Thar?  
Instead he chose Umar... he chose Abu Bakr, he chose Uthman.  And then he gave his own daughter to Umar (which Shias deny).  Shias today deny so many things. 

It is likely.  It was probably the case that he named his children after the Caliphs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, baqar said:

There is absolutely no evidence that he named any of his sons after any of the caliphs. 

Why would anyone named their sons similar to the names of those who had badly (if you think so) wronged him? It's like there are thousands name other than those.

Edited by 000

Share this post


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

“Whoever hates Ali (عليه السلام) is a hypocrite”

This prophetic hadith is not enjoining us start labeling, cursing or calling a hypocrite to whoever went against Imam Ali (عليه السلام).  This Hadith is for all Muslims to love Imam Ali (عليه السلام).  

 

If the Prophet said Whoever hates Ali (عليه السلام) is a hypocrite.... you said the hadith is for all Muslims to love Imam Ali(عليه السلام).

This where you and yours alike are doomed!

The Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) labelled whoever hates Ali (عليه السلام) is a hypocrite.  Are we above the Prophet not to follow his words?

There are other hadiths that asking Muslims to love Ali (عليه السلام).

So we boiled down to interpretation of clear hadith.

Just like khawarij interpreted the lifting of the Qur'an on the spear by muawiya during Siffin, but forgot the real Qur'an is with Ali (عليه السلام).

Now, it is cristal clear to us where you stand.

Let us explain to you why we call past persons as mukmin or munafiq.  So we don't repeat and follow their behavior and be careful of future when dealing with humans.  We don't care how Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will punish munafiqs or reward the mukmins.  The punishment and reward parts belong to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

We don't want current and future Muslims to be like Muawiya or Yazid.  We want Muslims to be like Ali (عليه السلام) and Fatema (عليه السلام)...loyal and upholding to the teachings of the Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).  So we label past people according to narrations of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). There are certainly rank among those who were with the Prophet.  Those who were loyal and rebellious to his teachings, and this is historical facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, baqar said:

Why do sons' names always have to be after close companions.

If I had a son, I might name him XYZ just because I liked the name XYZ.

My son does not have to be named after someone I know. 

Ofcourse not

but to name 3 sons with same names of those of  3 guys who supposedly most wronged you when you have a plethora of other names to choose from ?

 

Esp traditionally banu hashim names like obadiah,  harith, talib , zubair , rabiah,  jafar , jadah,   mughira, hamza etc not to mention friends names ,  Prophets names like musa , isah etc [ like talha sons ] 

Probability is low 

And even if let's say it was PURELY because the names of 3 caliphs are so amazing [ doubt it] , why don't we name our kids with same names?.why not after Uthman b mazoon ?

In Urdu we have a saying " pateeli say ziyada chamcha garam hai" fits perfectly 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, baqar said:

Also, my understanding is that Maula (عليه السلام)  did not name a son Uthman after Uthman bin Hunayf, rather after Uthman Maa'zoon, a very pious friend of Maula's.

Actually a companion of the Prophet too who died before Prophet himself.

SUre that could be but ibn huneyf brothers were old friends of Imam too 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


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

The practice of calling those very close to the Prophet (S) as munafiq and disbeliever   is an insult to the Prophet (S).  There is no fear it is just insulting and it is foolish.  It is foolish because it reflects poorly on the Ummah of the Prophet (S).  The Prophet (S) said that his (S) Ummah is the best Ummah.  This is why Ahlul Sunnah cannot make sense of the Shia narrative.

Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, “While I was sleeping, a group (of my followers were brought close to me), and when I recognised them, a man (an angel) came out from amongst (us) me and them, he said (to them), ‘Come along.’ I asked, ‘Where?’ He said, ‘To the (Hell) Fire, by Allah’ I asked, ‘what is wrong with them?’ He said, ‘They turned APOSTATE as renegades after you left.’ Then behold! (Another) group (of my followers) were brought close to me, and when I recognised them, a man (an angel) came out from (me and them) he said (to them); Come along. ‘I asked, “Where?’ He said, ‘To the (Hell) Fire, by Allah.’ I asked, ‘What is wrong with them?’ He said, ‘They turned APOSTATE as renegades after you left. So I did not see anyone of them escaping except a few who were like camels without a shepherd.”
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8 Hadith 587

Narrated Abu Hazim from Sahl bin Sa’d:
The Prophet said, “I am your predecessor (forerunner) at the Lake-Fount, and whoever will pass by there, he will drink from it and whoever will drink from it, he will never be thirsty. There will come to me some people whom I will recognise, and they will recognise me, but a barrier will be placed between me and them.” Abu Hazim added: Nu’man bin Abi ‘Aiyash, on hearing me, said. “Did you hear this from Sahl?” I said, “Yes.” He said, ” I bear witness that I heard Abu Said al-Khudri saying the same, adding that the Prophet said: ‘I will say: They are my companions. Then it will be said to me, ‘You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you left’. I will say, ‘Far removed, far removed (from mercy), those who changed after me.” Abu Huraira narrated that the Prophet said, “On the Day of Resurrection a group of companions will come to me, but will be driven away from the Lake-Fount, and I will say, ‘O Lord (those are) my companions!’ It will be said, ‘You have no knowledge as to what they innovated after you left; they turned apostate as renegades (reverted from the true Islam)”
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8 Hadith 585

Sahih Muslim, Book 038, Number 6688:

Qais reported: I said to ‘Ammar: What is your opinion about that which you have done in case (of your siding with Hadrat ‘Ali)? Is it your personal opinion or something you got from Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him)? ‘Ammar said: We have got nothing from Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) which people at large did not get, but Hudhaifa told me that Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) had especially told him amongst his Companions, that there would be twelve hypocrites out of whom eight would not get into Paradise, until a camel would be able to pass through the needle hole. The ulcer would be itself sufficient (to kill) eight. So far as four are concerned, I do not remember what Shu’ba said about them.

It is the love of Ahlul Sunnah for Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that they say "may God be pleased with him" to a person who started the practice of cursing Imam Ali (عليه السلام) from mosques. 

As I already said, these sort of narratives would only display lack of "furqan".

Share this post


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

The practice of calling those very close to the Prophet (S) as munafiq and disbeliever   is an insult to the Prophet (S).  There is no fear it is just insulting and it is foolish.  It is foolish because it reflects poorly on the Ummah of the Prophet (S).  The Prophet (S) said that his (S) Ummah is the best Ummah.  This is why Ahlul Sunnah cannot make sense of the Shia narrative.  
 

Having said this, 

we do criticize what is blameworthy and we praise what is praiseworthy.  We use our judgment where it counts.  

but we don’t go the extreme of labeling individuals a kafir, or a munafiq.  this is simply not our prerogative. 

We do believe God is Just.  We fear His Justice.  But there is a difference between knowing that God is Just and knowing “how” God is just.  We are not allowed to arrogate His justice.  Not only is there no benefit in doing so but it is arrogant.  
 

 

No it does NOT

Calling anyone other than the Prophet any names does not make you an unbeliever , or insult the Prophet 

Khawarij called Imam names but he didn't treat them as apostates 

 

 

Share this post


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

Right. If anything this proves the Sunnah stance of respecting all the Sahabah and leaving the judgement to God.  

Can we extend this to killers of Uthman too? 

Kinana b bishr (رضي الله عنه) , muhhamd b abi bakr (رضي الله عنه)

may God reward him for their qisas?  

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


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

is the love of Ahlul Sunnah for Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that they say "may God be pleased with him" to a person who started the practice of cursing Imam Ali (عليه السلام) from mosques. 

Just look at the tenure of this practice. 

"Cursing Ali was a state policy pursued by the Umayyad Caliphate between 41 and 132 AH in order to discredit the partisans of Ali and enforce loyalty to the state."

But "may God be pleased with him" before the one who originated this bida'h is necessary. How can anyone respect anyone who has not respected Imam Ali (عليه السلام)? And who never changed himself & his wrong practices and died in the same state.

How can God be pleased with such a person. Logical Impossibility!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Cool said:

I think the fear of Ahlul Sunnah is that if they call Muawiyah as munafiq, it will put into question Abu Bakr, Umar & Uthman as well because all of them have nurtured him as gave him important positions during their tenure of caliphates. 

They have to protect Muawiyah otherwise if they accept him as munafiq which is truly the case,  the only way left for them is to quit their Sunni ideology. 

Rather if open criticism of ANY companion is allowed it will throw a huge wrench in their hadith validation system.

If sahaba can be lying about the Prophet how do we validate chains to the Prophet ?

So defending sahaba is critical to maintaining the hadith.

 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 000 said:

I think SCers should watch this, and hopefully can appreciate this. This perspective rarely get exposed to us, because we have extremes that too much delved into polemics.

It isn't rare. I agree with it his underlying idea. But boy oh boy the can of worms this video opens,

What I don't agree with is the definition of companion that the youtube sheikh uses, which he gets from thin air apparently.

We use Quranic/hadith criteria for what defines an actual companion of the Prophet (pbubf). You know, stuff like don't run from battle like a coward, don't question the Prophet's (pbuhf) knowledge and judgements, don't raise your voice over his, have love for his near-kin etc. These people should be respected and it is them May Allah be pleased with them, but if for example someone does not love Imam Ali (عليه السلام), he is not a companion as per this divine criteria.

 

We don't use the criteria 'if you glimpse the Prophet live, your his buddy (companion), and you should NOT ONLY be respected, but ALSO people will pray for God to be merciful to you'. Although this wasn't stated in the video, it is heavily implied, and is the classical Sunni/wahabi argument which is not even based on Qur'an nor sunnah.

If the argument is "out of respect" we do not speak about treacherous individuals, at least don't go lumping May God be please with him under the excuse he is a "companion"... treachery is treachery, otherwise you are literally saying May God be pleased with an individual who warred against haqq (as per your youtube sheikh) and therefore Allah.

 

Also slandering is not the same as sending laa'na. He is conflating this earlier in the video. Nobody should slander anyone because we as Muslims do not use filthy insults. It is funny that the "sheikh" conveniently emphasizes this latter point at the end of the video, but does not emphasize it in the correct context of what he said earlier in the video... he is either deluding himself or his IQ is less than 70, or he is outright lying. I personally think he is deluding himself but I mean, only Allah knows right?

Anyway, not sending laa'na means not expressing hate towards those who oppose Allah openly and kill His slaves unrighteously, and not expressing hatred to those opposers is akin to remaining silent in the face of clear injustice, in other words, complicity in wrong-doing and sin. One cannot love justice without hating and obliterating injustice.

Finally, youtube sheikh says the more love you have for Ali in your heart, the more iman you have in your heart. Tell me, how can you genuinely love Ali and not despise and show contempt to his enemies? How is it one can apparently love Allah, but not despise those who plot against Allah? Logically, you cannot love a person without hating their mortal enemies no matter which way you look at it, otherwise a lie is being said or a delusion being expressed. "Where do I stand with Hussein? where do I stand with Fatima", certainly not on their side, somewhere in the "middle", otherwise like them you would pray to Allah to withdraw His mercy from their enemies, not that Allah be pleased with them.

 

P.S. I like how he calls the war a "fight" in the video as if 1000s weren't killed. I mean "people are not infallible", its all good, slice and dice a few guys its cool, may Allah be pleased with... lol.

23 hours ago, dragonxx said:

just that there is a *cough* minor *cough* "disagreement"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Rather if open criticism of ANY companion is allowed it will throw a huge wrench in their hadith validation system.

If sahaba can be lying about the Prophet how do we validate chains to the Prophet ?

So defending sahaba is critical to maintaining the hadith.

 

Jesus.

You would fit perfectly in a corrupt government with reasoning like that; do not admit faults otherwise we will lose face and credibility, and chaos will ensue. I wonder then how much faith did the people have in the first place if admitting and correcting a fault causes chaos?

 

Share this post


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

Jesus.

You would fit perfectly in a corrupt government with reasoning like that; do not admit faults otherwise we will lose face and credibility, and chaos will ensue. I wonder then how much faith did the people have in the first place if admitting and correcting a fault causes chaos?

 

True 

But this not specific to Sunnis. Atleast they accept some Shia and khawarij narraters.

They favor uthmani narraters more than Alid narraters sadly claiming later exaggerate fabricate blah blah 

Tail ALWAYS wags the dog 

In imami Shia hadith do they accept hadith from anyone other than impeccable imami credentials?

Imami Shia DO NOT need a chain all the way to the Prophet. as they claim their Imams are infallible and lack of narrations from earlier companions of Prophet is circumvented this way.Just narrate a hadith to the fifth Imam or later and it's as good as coming from Prophet.So imamis have little need to defend credibility of Prophets companions even those loyal to Ali as they take very few hadith from them.

Very smart people on both sides 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


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

^^^^ what exactly is 12er criteria for defining a sahabi?

 

25 minutes ago, dragonxx said:

You know, stuff like don't run from battle like a coward, don't question the Prophet's (pbuhf) knowledge and judgements, don't raise your voice over his, have love for his near-kin etc.

I'm sure you can google more regarding this including references, or someone more knowledgeable can give more depth. 

Share this post


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

^^^^ what exactly is 12er criteria for defining a sahabi?

I thought anyone who did not "return " to Ali is not reliable?

I was shocked to hear from a Lebanese Shia once that Hazrat Bilal (رضي الله عنه) was not a true companion.  

I mean.. I never heard this growing up...  but if this is true, oh my God!   Astaghfirullah.  Extremists really know no bounds.

 

 

Share this post


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

It was probably the case that he named his children after the Caliphs.  

Well nigh impossible!

The caliphs were men whose direct actions had caused unlimited grief to his wife.

To the extent that she never spoke to them for the rest of her short life and frequently complained about them.

The first caliph invented a hadith - I am using the word "invented" because the hadith cannot possibly be true.

And it cannot possibly be true because the Prophet was not so irresponsible that he would tell Abu Bakr something that relates to his daughter, but he wouldn't tell her. 

That is simply impossible - simply out of the question.

According to all historians, both Sunni and Shia, she was terribly aggrieved by their behaviour.

Also, apart from some scattered hadiths in Sunni books, there is no real evidence that Maula Ali (عليه السلام) had any real affection for them.

Sure, he helped them as a matter of duty, but not because of affection.  

Share this post


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

I was shocked to hear from a Lebanese Shia once that Hazrat Bilal (رضي الله عنه) was not a true companion. 

Lots of people have their personal opinions which do not represent the stamp of authority.

Ignore such opinions, brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 000 said:

Why would anyone named their sons similar to the names of those who had badly (if you think so) wronged him? It's like there are thousands name other than those.

True.

But it does not directly follow that he named them to honour the caliphs.

In the case of Umar and Uthman, I distinctly remember hearing in a majlis by Maulana Sadiq Hasan that he named his sons after (a) Umar bin Abu Salama, the son of Bibi Umme Salma from her first husband and (b) Uthman Ma'zoon 

The only one that we do not know is Abu Bakr.

Who knows - may be there was a close friend of his by that name.

Be that as it may, unless he said so, we cannot just assume that he named his son after the first caliph.  

 

Edited by baqar

Share this post


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

 

Look, I'm not even trying to defend sunnism, but I just want to say this:

Undoubtedly, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was the most competent man, but can't you see the glimpse of wisdom why Imam Ali (عليه السلام) behaved such. His wisdom is too high for us too comprehend fully that it's hard to say why he named his sons such and not even saying bad things about them. After all of his Imam Ali (عليه السلام), I can say for sure saying bad things about them is just against the project that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) had sacrificed for. The only safe way is we should have more benefit of the doubt.

I'm only sure for one thing, anything that has been happened is the best thing you can get, including the caliphate of Abu Bakr. The people weren't ready for Imam Ali like we are still not ready for Imam Mahdi. The fact that we still don't deserve Imam Mahdi, should tell you something

 

Share this post


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

It isn't rare. I agree with it his underlying idea. But boy oh boy the can of worms this video opens,

What I don't agree with is the definition of companion that the youtube sheikh uses, which he gets from thin air apparently.

We use Quranic/hadith criteria for what defines an actual companion of the Prophet (pbubf). You know, stuff like don't run from battle like a coward, don't question the Prophet's (pbuhf) knowledge and judgements, don't raise your voice over his, have love for his near-kin etc. These people should be respected and it is them May Allah be pleased with them, but if for example someone does not love Imam Ali (عليه السلام), he is not a companion as per this divine criteria.

The criteria is simple.  he should have "seen" the Prophet (S) and not have uttered disbelief before having died.  This is a sahaba by definition.  And I find this profound because this shows the Powerful Presence of Seyyidna Muhammad Mustafa (S).  Shias don't seem to have this sense of appreciation of the "alchemical effect" found in just the presence of the Prophet (S).  Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamah however see this value.   I once asked a Sunni friend of mine of what qualifies one as a Sahaba... and when he told me that one just had to look at the Prophet (S) or the Prophet (S) just had to look at him... I objected as any typical Shia would by saying, "how can that be a criteria for respect!!".  And what he replied to me made me feel so ashamed... he said this is because the Prophet (S) was no ordinary human!  The Prophet(S) very presence and gaze had a transformative effect!  This answer alone is proof that Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamah have a strong connection with Seyyidna Muhammad Mustafa (S).  And this is proof of the disconnect many Shias have with the Prophet (S).    

Quote

We don't use the criteria 'if you glimpse the Prophet live, your his buddy (companion), and you should NOT ONLY be respected, but ALSO people will pray for God to be merciful to you'. Although this wasn't stated in the video, it is heavily implied, and is the classical Sunni/wahabi argument which is not even based on Qur'an nor sunnah.

It is based on something most Shias have lost.  The connection to the Prophet (S).

Quote

If the argument is "out of respect" we do not speak about treacherous individuals, at least don't go lumping May God be please with him under the excuse he is a "companion"... treachery is treachery, otherwise you are literally saying May God be pleased with an individual who warred against haqq (as per your youtube sheikh) and therefore Allah.

No, you can speak about treachery and treacherous actions committed by people all you want.  But it is not our prerogative to name such an individual "treacherous".  We are not saying "Radhiyallu Anh" for his treacherous actions!  But rather we are saying "Radhiyallahu Anh" simply and ONLY because of him being a companion of Seyyidna Muhammad Mustafa (S) as per the definition of "Sahaba" by Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jama'a.  

  

Quote

Also slandering is not the same as sending laa'na. He is conflating this earlier in the video. Nobody should slander anyone because we as Muslims do not use filthy insults. It is funny that the "sheikh" conveniently emphasizes this latter point at the end of the video, but does not emphasize it in the correct context of what he said earlier in the video... he is either deluding himself or his IQ is less than 70, or he is outright lying. I personally think he is deluding himself but I mean, only Allah knows right?

By the way, I would recommend, for your own sake, to show respect to the Sheikh (even though he is not my Sheikh).  But he is a very pious man of God and has written numerous works on which you might find beneficial.... he also speaks a lot on the love of the Ahlul Bayt (as)).  This lecture he gave was his attempt to speak about the greatness of Imam Ali (عليه السلام).   At least you should respect him for that (if you are not able to respect him for being a human).  So, saying something insulting about such a man means that I should ignore you.  You are not worthy of even being called "Shia" with your disgraceful behavior.   

You speak about the nifaq of someone who makes "war" with Imam Ali (عليه السلام), how about the person who is attempting to praise Imam Ali (عليه السلام) such as this Sheikh (Ninowy) and who, by the way, was commanded to praise the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) by the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) themselves in his very dreams/ visions?  You speak in a demeaning way of such a person? What does that make you?   God knows best!

 

Quote

Anyway, not sending laa'na means not expressing hate towards those who oppose Allah openly and kill His slaves unrighteously, and not expressing hatred to those opposers is akin to remaining silent in the face of clear injustice, in other words, complicity in wrong-doing and sin. One cannot love justice without hating and obliterating injustice.

Finally, youtube sheikh says the more love you have for Ali in your heart, the more iman you have in your heart. Tell me, how can you genuinely love Ali and not despise and show contempt to his enemies? How is it one can apparently love Allah, but not despise those who plot against Allah? Logically, you cannot love a person without hating their mortal enemies no matter which way you look at it, otherwise a lie is being said or a delusion being expressed. "Where do I stand with Hussein? where do I stand with Fatima", certainly not on their side, somewhere in the "middle", otherwise like them you would pray to Allah to withdraw His mercy from their enemies, not that Allah be pleased with them.

 

P.S. I like how he calls the war a "fight" in the video as if 1000s weren't killed. I mean "people are not infallible", its all good, slice and dice a few guys its cool, may Allah be pleased with... lol.

 

I am ignoring the one that speaks ill of a believer.   I am not on this forum to read such nonsense.

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, baqar said:

True.

But it does not directly follow that he named them to honour the caliphs.

In the case of Umar and Uthman, I distinctly remember hearing in a majlis by Maulana Sadiq Hasan that he named his sons after Umar bin Abu Salam and Uthman Ma'zoon 

The only one that we do not know is Abu Bakr.

Who knows - may be there was a close friend of his by that name.

Be that as it may, unless he said so, we cannot just assume that he named him after the first caliph. 

So you don't think that he badly wronged Imam Ali (عليه السلام)?

As for the name Abu Bakr.... For an important person like close friend of his by that name, there is not even a slightest clue about any historical record that implies there was Abu Bakr other than the Abu Bakr.

Edited by 000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, baqar said:

Lots of people have their personal opinions which do not represent the stamp of authority.

Ignore such opinions, brother.

Yes, but he said a Shia sheikh told him that.  

And by the way, why should I ignore it?

The logic of modern day Shias are that whoever did not support Imam Ali (عليه السلام) against Abu Bakr is a munafiq or is not a Shia of Ali.

Hmm...  so which side was Bilal on?  hmm..  he wasn't with Imam Ali (عليه السلام)... so that means he was not with the TRUTH.  hmm, that makes him a munafiq.

This is the logic....  This is why I am not surprised if I find out that this is a popular view.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, layman said:

If the Prophet said Whoever hates Ali (عليه السلام) is a hypocrite.... you said the hadith is for all Muslims to love Imam Ali(عليه السلام).

This where you and yours alike are doomed!

It is so easy for you to come to the conclusion of who is doomed I have noticed....  next thing..... I am doomed.     Why am I not surprised? 

All such statements just strengthen whatever I am saying. 

4 hours ago, layman said:

The Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) labelled whoever hates Ali (عليه السلام) is a hypocrite.  Are we above the Prophet not to follow his words?

He (S) wasn't telling us to know who a hypocrite is, he (S)  was telling us not to be hypocritical ourselves by not loving him (عليه السلام).  It is not for us to judge who loves Ali (عليه السلام) and who doesn't (عليه السلام).    

4 hours ago, layman said:

So we boiled down to interpretation of clear hadith.

Just like khawarij interpreted the lifting of the Qur'an on the spear by muawiya during Siffin, but forgot the real Qur'an is with Ali (عليه السلام).

Now, it is cristal clear to us where you stand.

Let us explain to you why we call past persons as mukmin or munafiq.  So we don't repeat and follow their behavior and be careful of future when dealing with humans.  We don't care how Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will punish munafiqs or reward the mukmins.  The punishment and reward parts belong to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

We don't want current and future Muslims to be like Muawiya or Yazid.  We want Muslims to be like Ali (عليه السلام) and Fatema (عليه السلام)...loyal and upholding to the teachings of the Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).  So we label past people according to narrations of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). There are certainly rank among those who were with the Prophet.  Those who were loyal and rebellious to his teachings, and this is historical facts.

Judging the actions is all we can do and all we need!  Judging people, however, is not only not beneficial but dangerous!  There is no end otherwise.  

 

Share this post


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

I once asked a Sunni friend of mine of what qualifies one as a Sahaba... and when he told me that one just had to look at the Prophet (S) or the Prophet (S) just had to look at him... I objected as any typical Shia would by saying, "how can that be a criteria for respect!!".  And what he replied to me made me feel so ashamed... he said this is because the Prophet (S) was no ordinary human!  The Prophet(S) very presence and gaze had a transformative effect!  This answer alone is proof that Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jamah have a strong connection with Seyyidna Muhammad Mustafa (S).  And this is proof of the disconnect many Shias have with the Prophet (S).    

Congratulations!!!

He convinced you and both of you made Abu Laheb, Abu Jahal and other kuffar & munafiqeen of that era companions.

MashaAllah

Lets see few verses:

Surah Al-Mujadila, Verse 22:
لَّا تَجِدُ قَوْمًا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ يُوَادُّونَ مَنْ حَادَّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَلَوْ كَانُوا آبَاءَهُمْ أَوْ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ أَوْ إِخْوَانَهُمْ أَوْ عَشِيرَتَهُمْ أُولَٰئِكَ كَتَبَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمُ الْإِيمَانَ وَأَيَّدَهُم بِرُوحٍ مِّنْهُ وَيُدْخِلُهُمْ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُوا عَنْهُ أُولَٰئِكَ حِزْبُ اللَّهِ أَلَا إِنَّ حِزْبَ اللَّهِ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ

You shall not find a people who believe in Allah and the latter day befriending those who act in opposition to Allah and His Apostle, even though they were their (own) fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their kinsfolk; these are they into whose hearts He has impressed faith, and whom He has strengthened with an inspiration from Him: and He will cause them to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein; Allah is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him these are Allah's party: now surely the party of Allah are the successful ones.
(English - Shakir)

Now we continuously need to remind everyone that look Ali (عليه السلام) is nafs e Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), whoever fought with him has fought with Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) & His Apostle.

Surah At-Taubah, Verse 101:
وَمِمَّنْ حَوْلَكُم مِّنَ الْأَعْرَابِ مُنَافِقُونَ وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَرَدُوا عَلَى النِّفَاقِ لَا تَعْلَمُهُمْ نَحْنُ نَعْلَمُهُمْ سَنُعَذِّبُهُم مَّرَّتَيْنِ ثُمَّ يُرَدُّونَ إِلَىٰ عَذَابٍ عَظِيمٍ

And from among those who are round about you of the dwellers of the desert there are hypocrites, and from among the people of Medina (also); they are stubborn in hypocrisy; you do not know them; We know them; We will chastise them twice then shall they be turned back to a grievous chastisement
(English - Shakir)

Even after these sort of verses, we continuously see award winning ceremonies on daily basis where people make companions those who are exposed hypocrites.

What a "furqan"!!

 

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...