Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Imam jafar (as) praising one of the caliphs, why?

Rate this topic


Oskar

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
On 6/16/2020 at 2:34 PM, Guest Crescent said:

Believing a kaffir is braver than a sahaba.........shiaism you can’t beat it.

Firstly that's a fact, go read history. Abu Jahl was killed by Muslims during fight in badr & Umar ran in Uhud and other battles. Secondly we don't believe him to be a 'Sahaba'. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crescent
12 hours ago, Sirius_Bright said:

Firstly that's a fact, go read history. Abu Jahl was killed by Muslims during fight in badr & Umar ran in Uhud and other battles. Secondly we don't believe him to be a 'Sahaba'. 

No it’s rather your THEORY. Go read AUTHENTIC history. 
Keep believing in the bravery of a kaffir and use false accusations against a Muslim.

shia Logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/14/2020 at 4:32 AM, MuhammadHasanAlBritani said:

Wa Alaykum Salam Akhi,

My brother why have dislike in your heart towards the lovers of Ahlul Bayt (may Allah bless them and guide them)?

Imam Bukhari Rahimullah was not of the Nawasib, he narrates from Imam Ali Karramallahu Wajhu (so many hadith e.g. in his Sahih, Book 3, Hadith 48, Book 19, Hadith 7, Book 34, Hadith 42 etc. it is an injustice for me to bring the single one I brought below) and he also narrates from the beloved daughter of Rasulallah Salallahu Alayhi Wa Salam, Fatima Alayha as-Salam .

E.g. Here is an example of a Hadith he relates from Imam Ali Karamallahu Wajhu:

And here is one from Fatimah Alayha as-Salam:

And Subhanallah, look who Fatimah Alayha as-Salam narrates from above.

 

My brother, can we call Imam Bukhari Rahimullah a Nawasib when he tells us that there are many Sahih hadith that he left out of his Sahih, and yet he purposefully brings this hadith:

And note in the chapter title he puts "Alayha as-Salam" after her name, whilst with Aisha Radiyallahu Anha he puts "Radiyallahu Anha".

And Imam Bukhari Rahimullah's student, Imam Tirmidhi Rahimullah, who went blind from crying for his teacher when he passed away, relates hadith like Jami'at Tirmidhi Vol. 1, Book 46, Hadith 3789 where he quotes the Prophet Alayhis Salatu Wa-Salam telling people to love Ahlul Bayt.

So please my brother, do not say Imam Bukhari was of the Nawasib, he was a lover of Ahlul Bayt. Please do not dislike our lovers of Ahlul Bayt.

May Allah grant you goodness, increase you in your worship of him, and your love of the Prophet Salallahu Alayhi Wa Salam and may he increase your love of the Ahlul Bayt as well as those who are amongst their lovers.

 

What aboutism. Sunnis always did and do taqiyya when it comes to the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). I’ve never said that BukharI hasn’t narrated from the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), I said that he never narrated directly from Imam Jafar al-Sadiq (عليه السلام). Sunnis have no love for the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), these ahadith are only in the books to reinforce the Sunni theological and historical belief. Umayyads and Abbasids realised that the slaughter and genocide can’t stop the Alids, so they put in place massive propaganda machine of a carrot and a stick, on one hand they killed Shias, on the other they pretended to love Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/14/2020 at 4:56 AM, MuhammadHasanAlBritani said:

And Imam Bukhari Rahimullah did not narrate from Imam Jafar as-Sadiq Rahimullah for the same reason he doesn't report from Imam Abu Hanifah Rahimullah and Imam Malik Rahimullah - they are Fuqahah and his book is a book on the hadith of the Prophet Alayhis Salatu Wa-Salam not necessarily a book of fiqh.

This doesn't negate that the Imams of fiqh had ahadith, it just means Imam Bukhari Rahimullah chose the shortest chains.

If he had related from the Fuqahah he would have to relate from them through reliable people, and many times e.g. Imam Bukhari Rahimullah will say that certain students of Imam Abu Hanifah Rahimullah are not reliable transmitters of Prophetic Hadith (and others like Abdullah Ibn Mubarak Rahimullah he will take from) - this is not because Imam Bukhari Rahimullah hated the students of the Mujtahid Imams - it is because he has to be strict and he has to take the people with the best memory.

You can’t compare the nasibi and fallible laymen like Bukhari to infallible descendants of the last Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)). One acquire knowledge through learning, the others already possess it. One is sinful and fallible, the others are infallible and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) appointees on Earth. You take your religion from the first group, we take ours from the latter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/16/2020 at 9:04 PM, Guest Crescent said:

Believing a kaffir is braver than a sahaba.........shiaism you can’t beat it.

He was ironic pointing out that unlike Umar, his uncle at least was brave enough to not run away from the battlefield and he died fighting. We have no love for any enemies of Islam. Sahaba were not infallible, many of them turned apostates and innovators, as per Sunni ahadith. Many of them were opportunists and openly declared their hate for the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), for example, al-Mughira. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2020 at 1:18 PM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Sermon is authentic.

It is authentic.  But are you saying it is immune from tahreef?  What is your proof that it is mutawatur?  

that was a rhetorical question.  obviously you won't have any proof because it isn't mutawatur!  

Edited by eThErEaL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/16/2020 at 1:34 PM, Guest Crescent said:

Believing a kaffir is braver than a sahaba.........shiaism you can’t beat it.

Salam ʿAmr b. ʿAbdiwudd was the most brave hero of Kafirs of Quraysh that in battle of Ahzab (Khandaq) that challenged  all Sahabas to fight with him but nobody except Imam Ali (عليه السلام) accepted his challenge when all Sahabas were hiding themselves to run away from Amr's challenge that when they usurped right of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) after demise of prophet Muhammad (pbu) then she asked who fought with ʿAmr b. ʿAbdiwudd when each one of three caliphs were hiding themselves to save their life .

Quote

ʿAmr b. ʿAbdiwudd (Arabic: عَمرو بن عَبدِوُدّ) or ʿAmr b. ʿAbdiwadd (Arabic: عَمرو بن عَبدِوَدّ) was among the best warriors of Quraysh who was killed in the battle of Ahzāb (also called Khandaq) by Imam Ali (a). According to some hadiths, the Prophet (s) mentioned Imam Ali's (a) strike at 'Amr better than the worships of all humans and jinns. Ibn Taymiyya, the Sunni scholar and the founder of Salafism, rejected the existence of 'Amr b. 'Abdiwudd. Some researchers considered his motive to be rejecting the merits of Imam Ali (a).

Doubting the Existence of 'Amr b. 'Abdiwudd

Ibn Taymiyya, the Sunni scholar and the founder of Salafism, doubted the existence of 'Amr b. 'Abdiwudd.[11] He believed that there is no name of 'Amr b. 'Abdiwudd in any of the battles of BadrUhud and also other Ghazwas and Sariyyas and what happened in the battle of Khandaq is not mentioned either in Sahih Muslim or Sahih Bukhari.[12] But, the attendance of 'Amr b. 'Abdiwudd in the battle of Khandaq is mentioned in historical sources such as Tarikh Tabari[13] and Dhahabi's Tarikh al-Islam.[14] Also, Hakim Niyshaburi, the Sunni scholar transmitted a report about the attendance of 'Amr b. 'Abdiwudd in the battle of Badr and his injury in al-Mustadrak 'ala al-Sahihayn.[15] Some researchers considered Ibn Taymiyya's doubting out of his intention for rejecting Imam Ali's (a) merits.[16]

http://en.wikishia.net/view/'Amr_b._'Abd_Wadd

Edited by Ashvazdanghe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I think there's a tendency here to get stuck in secondary details and arguments. 

An Imam may have guided someone, helped someone and even praised some of their actions. The core point at the end of the day is this: the system of khilafa was man made and lacks a basis in Qur'an and hadith. Therefore we as Shi'a do not look towards the caliphs as religious guides. They don't really have any role or function for us. The aimmah (عليه السلام) on the other hand have been specifically nominated by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) through the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) as religious guides and are therefore our reference after him ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)). 

This is the core point. 

The second relevant point here is that if anyone opposed Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), the prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) and the aimmah (عليه السلام), we disassociate from such people. It doesn't matter how prominent or popular such a person may be, the rule applies to everyone. 

Beyond this one can speculate and debate for hours on why someone was named in a certain manner, why someone was praised for a certain act and why someone was helped on a certain task. It doesn't change the above points. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/18/2020 at 6:01 PM, Guest Crescent said:

No it’s rather your THEORY. Go read AUTHENTIC history. 
Keep believing in the bravery of a kaffir and use false accusations against a Muslim.

shia Logic.

No. No. I'm not saying Abu Jahl was brave but he definitely was when compared to Umar ibn Khattab. Also, why can't a Kafir be brave? Marhab, Amr ibne Adbawad, etc weren't brave? 

Edited by Sirius_Bright
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
9 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

It is authentic.  But are you saying it is immune from tahreef?  What is your proof that it is mutawatur?  

that was a rhetorical question.  obviously you won't have any proof because it isn't mutawatur!  

So then lets stop acting upon and using hadiths that are not mutawatir on Ahlesunnahs side.

Agreed?

Plus this sermon doesn't has one chain only, it has 17 chains. I have got 2 of them only. So the chance of tehreef falls down to minimum. The more than chains, the more reliable sermons becomes.

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/17/2020 at 3:04 AM, Warilla said:

Too many posts. What was the actual hadith the OP is talking about?

That hadith of Usman mentioned in first comment from Al-Kafi. Question was whether it was authentic or not.

See my 1st comment of first page you'll get that hadith. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2020 at 3:11 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

So then lets stop acting upon and using hadiths that are not mutawatir on Ahlesunnahs side.

Agreed?

lol.  It doesn’t work that way.  There is reason to some of the “words” in the sermon of Shakshakiyyah.  There was a classical Shia scholar (forgetting the name now— but mentioned in Reza Shah Kazim’s most recent book on Imam Ali (as))) who also once said that the entire sermon in its exact wordings may not necessarily be accurate.  I am not just bringing things out of my mind.  Who am I afterall? I am a nobody from Shiachat (afterall).  

On 6/20/2020 at 3:11 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/20/2020 at 3:11 AM, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

So then lets stop acting upon and using hadiths that are not mutawatir on Ahlesunnahs side.

Agreed?

Plus this sermon doesn't has one chain only, it has 17 chains. I have got 2 of them only. So the chance of tehreef falls down to minimum. The more than chains, the more reliable sermons becomes.

There is a reason to doubt some of the words in the sermon of Shakshakiyyah. 
had to edit this.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

lol.  It doesn’t work that way.  There is reason to some of the “words” in the sermon of Shakshakiyyah.  There was a classical Shia scholar (forgetting the name now— but mentioned in Reza Shah Kazim’s most recent book on Imam Ali (as))) who also once said that the entire sermon in its exact wordings may not necessarily be accurate.  I am not just bringing things out of my mind.  Who am I afterall? I am a nobody from Shiachat (afterall).  

Alright. Whats the evidence for tehreef? Can you bring an authentic chain in which some words are missing? Then please go ahead and paste it here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

There is a reason to doubt some of the words in the sermon of Shakshakiyyah. 
had to edit this.  

This doubt should have some basis.

Thats just like free fire lol. I mean, think for yourself, don't you think there should be some proof for it? Plus it has 17 chains.

If you wanna doubt then all Akhbaar e Ahaad will become doubtful and you'll have to leave sunni and shia islam forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
10 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

mentioned in Reza Shah Kazim’s most recent book on Imam Ali (as)))

He belongs to the Ismaili faith :censored: your research is like a blind person follows a blind person in a dark & slippery road

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reza_Shah-Kazemi

https://www.iis.ac.uk/people/dr-reza-shah-kazemi

Yellow triangle caution slippery floor logo sign Vector Image

Edited by Ashvazdanghe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
On 6/20/2020 at 6:37 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam ʿAmr b. ʿAbdiwudd was the most brave hero of Kafirs of Quraysh that in battle of Ahzab (Khandaq) that challenged  all Sahabas to fight with him but nobody except Imam Ali (عليه السلام) accepted his challenge when all Sahabas were hiding themselves to run away from Amr's challenge that when they usurped right of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) after demise of prophet Muhammad (pbu) then she asked who fought with ʿAmr b. ʿAbdiwudd when each one of three caliphs were hiding themselves to save their life .

http://en.wikishia.net/view/'Amr_b._'Abd_Wadd

Wasalam Brilliant site to use and NO authentic evidence, you’ve got me on this one,lol.

Nothing in bukhari or Muslim and nothing from authenticity but Tabari and wikishia.

Thankyou.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
On 6/20/2020 at 7:34 AM, Sirius_Bright said:

No. No. I'm not saying Abu Jahl was brave but he definitely was when compared to Umar ibn Khattab. Also, why can't a Kafir be brave? Marhab, Amr ibne Adbawad, etc weren't brave? 

Exactly so a kaafir was stronger in your mind that’s just typical hate.

FYI after reverting to Islam Umar ra knocked on Abu Jahls door and shouted he has turned Muslim.

yet here you are in your bubble using hate and an unknown unauthentic character you and Ash pulled out from wikishia and Tabari.

Brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

yet here you are in your bubble using hate and an unknown unauthentic character you and Ash pulled out from wikishia and Tabari.

I'm surprised at how quickly you dismiss Tabari. It is the key historical reference for Islamic history, especially among the ahl us sunnah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

Exactly so a kaafir was stronger in your mind that’s just typical hate.

No. The one who is stronger is stronger. Doesn't matter if it's kafir or Muslim. Muslims ran from Marhab for 40 days in Khaibar - Marhab was stronger. Imam Ali (عليه السلام) killed Marhab - Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was stronger. 

3 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

FYI after reverting to Islam Umar ra knocked on Abu Jahls door and shouted he has turned Muslim.

Wowwww! Mind blown! 

3 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

yet here you are in your bubble using hate and an unknown unauthentic character you and Ash.. 

Hate - yes. We hate all those who opposed and oppressed Holy Ahlulbayt (عليهم اسلام). That may include those you like. Our standard is Ahlulbayt (عليهم اسلام), yours is Umar. 

3 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

pulled out from wikishia and Tabari.

Sure about Tabari? It's one of your important history book.

  • Yaqut al-Hamawi says ""Abu Jafar al-Tabari, was headmost the modernist, jurist, reciter, historian, philosopher."[62]
  • Al-Masudi, spoke about Tabari in The Meadows of Gold, "The history of Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir is superior to all other histories and to all the books written in history."[63]
  • Ibn Taymiyyah and Ali ibn al-Athir the two great scientists said of Tabar, "He was the leader in everything, and he did not turn to lust to convey history, and he observed justice."[64][65]
  • Al-Nawawi says about Tabari, "He has had a great look and thought among all his contemporaries."[66]
  • Ibn Khallikan says "In his day, he was the most diligent person in science and research."[67]
  • Ali ibn al-Athir says "Abu Ja`far is more reliable than transmitting history and its interpretation indicates evidence of abundant knowledge and achievement."[68]
  • Mohammad-Taqi Bahar says, "Although more historians like the Miskawayh, Al-Biruni, Al-Masudi and Ya'qubi but no one has suffered as much as Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari and no one has as much information about the Sassanids as Tabari."[69]
  • Jalal Khaleghi Motlagh says in University of Hamburg, "Ferdowsi Shahnameh with the History of the world by Tabari is complementary."[70]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Tabari

Edited by Sirius_Bright
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/18/2020 at 8:31 AM, Guest Crescent said:

No it’s rather your THEORY. Go read AUTHENTIC history. 
Keep believing in the bravery of a kaffir and use false accusations against a Muslim.

shia Logic.

Narrated by Abu Qatada We set out in the company of Allah's Apostle on the day (of the battle) of Hunain. When we faced the enemy, the Muslims retreated and I saw a pagan throwing himself over a Muslim. I turned around and came upon him from behind and hit him on the shoulder with the sword He (i.e. the pagan) came towards me and seized me so violently that I felt as if it were death itself, but death overtook him and he released me. I followed 'Umar bin Al Khattab and asked (him), "What is wrong with the people (FLEEING)?" He replied, "THIS IS THE WILL OF ALLAH," After the people returned, the Prophet sat and said, "Anyone who has killed an enemy and has a proof of that, will posses his spoils." I got up and said, "Who will be a witness for me?" and then sat down. The Prophet again said, "Anyone who has killed an enemy and has proof of that, will possess his spoils." I (again) got up and said, "Who will be a witness for me?" and sat down. Then the Prophet said the same for the third time. I again got up, and Allah's Apostle said, "O Abu Qatada! What is your story?" Then I narrated the whole story to him. A man (got up and) said, "O Allah's Apostle! He is speaking the truth, and the spoils of the killed man are with me. So please compensate him on my behalf." On that Abu Bakr said, "No, by Allah, he (i.e. Allah's Apostle ) will not agree to give you the spoils gained by one of Allah's Lions who fights on the behalf of Allah and His Apostle." The Prophet said, "Abu Bakr has spoken the truth." So, Allah's Apostle gave the spoils to me. I sold that armor (i.e. the spoils) and with its price I bought a garden at Bani Salima, and this was my first property which I gained after my conversion to Islam.

"Sahih" al-Bukhari Hadith number 4321

Umar said that fleeing was the will of Allah, read your Bukhari.

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...