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

Imam Ali a failed politician?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

One can not ignore the fact while going through history that Imam Ali made some very catastrophic decisions during his short political career. He was encountered by none other than Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Imam Hassan for such decisions. Right after the murder  of Uthman , Ali is seen as a power hungry man with very little political acumen who is haphazardly acting around till his death. 

He first tried to dethrone Maviya by asking Abdullah Ibn Abbas to go to Damascus and take over governorship from Maviya. Ibn Abbas was taken aback by this proposal. Perplexed  and shocked he asked if Ali was serious about it and warned Imam Ali of the political consequences but Ali refused to listen.

Imam Ali appointed Muhammad bin Abu Bakr as governor of Egypt in those precarious hours when Egypt was vital for Ali's Caliphate. Muhammad bin Abu Bakr (Imam Hassan used to call him Fasiq bin Abu Bakr) was himself a power hungry young lad and had no experience to handle a state like Egypt which was eyed upon by Maviya. Egypt fell with in a matter of days after Muhammad reached there just to get himself killed.

Imam Ali could not keep his ranks assembled during Siffain and one portion of his xie hard supporters left him on the matter of Tehkeem. This group which later came to be known as Khawarij , not only diluted the military strength of Imam Ali but one Kharijite eventually killed Imam Ali as well.

Imam Ali had lost popular support in his bastion Kufa by his last days. His last sermons in Kufa are filled with his self castigatings and condemnations of the people of Kufa. Tabari has recorded a shocking event in which Imam Ali announces Jihad from the pulpit in Kufa and went out to Nukhela waiting for Kufans to arrive. He waited there for a whole day and literally no one came out to join him.

These are just a few short examples of Imam Ali's political decisions. One can quote dozens of more such examples from his political career. Maviya on the other hand emerged victorious due to his unparalleled political wisdom and immaculate decision making capability. 

Edited by Leibniz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Though i believe that "infallibility of Imams" is a later day myth and the early Shias did not believe in it but given the erroneous nature of Imam Ali's decisions and their immediate consequences, how on earth can he be considered infallibe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيم

As Salamu Alaykum. Thats an interesting perspective of the events that I have hardly heard. Out of curiosity could you point me to the references you've used regarding this perspective?
 
I thought the belief was that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) wasn't there for politics or political ambitions, and his aim was Islam first and foremost. I agree that yeah maybe we can grade Muawiyah more politically successful on those grounds (possibly even grade Imam Ali (عليه السلام) as not a good politician?). However I wonder, if Muawiyahs maneuvering can be considered as not really Islamic, and if Imam Ali (عليه السلام) refused to go in that direction and play the game, then who was really the better person here? 
 
Nontheless, it is something I have always thought about myself, the troubles of the Imam (عليه السلام) during his caliphate. I'm not knowledgeable enough but I hope one of the brothers or sisters here can continue your discussion InshaAllah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
17 hours ago, Leibniz said:

One can not ignore the fact while going through history that Imam Ali made some very catastrophic decisions during his short political career. He was encountered by none other than Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Imam Hassan for such decisions. Right after the murder  of Uthman , Ali is seen as a power hungry man with very little political acumen who is haphazardly acting around till his death. 

You have completely  ignored the truth in the early days of caliphate of first caliph, Abu sufyan (the father of Muawiya) came to Imam Ali (عليه السلام). and offered soldiers so Imam Ali (عليه السلام) could start a revoloution against Abu Bakr and claim the khilafat. Imam Ali (عليه السلام) rejected it outright as soon as Abu Sufyan presented the idea to him. The last thing Imam Ali (عليه السلام) wanted was the ummah split in two with civil war. However, that was exactly what Abu Sufyan wanted. To incite a civil war within the muslims to create strife and to break the religion.

Ali (عليه السلام) was fully aware of the consequences and he did not fight for Khilafah in spite of the fact that he was a rightful successor of Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) and Abu Bakar was usurper.

From Sermon 5, of Nehjul balagha: O people, steer clear through the waves of mischief...

Delivered when the Holy Prophet died and ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib and Abu Sufyan ibn Harb offered to pay allegiance to Amir al-mu’minin for the Caliphate.

O People!1

Steer clear through the waves of mischief by boats of deliverance, turn away from the path of dissension and put off the crowns of pride. Prosperous is one who rises with wings (i.e. when he has power) or else he remains peaceful and others enjoy ease. It (i.e. the aspiration for Caliphate) is like turbid water or like a morsel that would suffocate the person who swallows it. One who plucks fruits before ripening is like one who cultivated in another’s field.

If I speak out they would call me greedy towards power but if I keep quiet they would say I was afraid of death. It is a pity that after all the ups and downs (I have been through). By Allah, the son of Abu Talib2 is more familiar with death than an infant with the breast of its mother. I have hidden knowledge, if I disclose it you will start trembling like ropes in deep wells.

https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-5-o-people-steer-clear-through-waves-mischief

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
18 hours ago, Leibniz said:

These are just a few short examples of Imam Ali's political decisions. One can quote dozens of more such examples from his political career. 

For Political thoughts of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) the following extracts are presented for your information:

Only a few know about his political thought, governance model and the role played by him in evolving the Islamic jurisprudence after the death of Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)). In fact, his political thought essentially paved the way for the establishment of a somewhat democratic, egalitarian and welfare-based polity during the Rashidun Caliphate. Nahj al-Balagha (peak of eloquence) is the most celebrated collection of sermons, letters and narrations attributed to Hazrat Ali.

The political thought of Hazrat Ali formed the underlying basis for a welfare Muslim state. In fact, a number of universally-acknowledged elements of good governance can well be traced back to this five-year Caliphate period (656-661 AD).

Nahj al-Balagha includes a famous letter written by Hazrat Ali to Maalik Ashtar, his newly-appointed governor in Egypt. Containing a set of useful instructions, this letter was primarily aimed at ensuring the efficient and people-centric governance in the province of the Caliphate. In this letter, Hazrat Ali exhaustively elaborated and discussed some important aspects of public governance. Therefore, for all intent and purposes, this letter is a great charter of good governance. This letter thoroughly reflects the underlying priorities, policies and practices of the Caliphate towards its subjects. Sternly believing the justice to be the principal basis for the state and the society, Hazrat Ali laid great emphasis on the efficient dispensation of justice in the Caliphate. He was equally convinced that “an un-Islamic government may last for a while, but tyranny cannot be endured at all.” He stated, “No nation or society, in which the stronger does not discharge its duty to the weaker, will rise to high position”.

Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has observed, “The Caliph Ali Bin Abi Talib is considered the fairest governor who appeared during human history (After the Prophet Muhammad). So we advised Arab countries to take Imam Ali as example in establishing a regime based on Justice, democracy and encouraging knowledge.” So the governance model of Hazrat Ali continue to serve as a guiding beacon for the rulers and governors through the ages. Indeed his political thought can also go a long way in establishing a democratic, egalitarian and just polity.

https://nation.com.pk/14-Jun-2017/political-thought-of-imam-ali

6 Acts of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that prove politics and ethics can be combined

Policy-making features in the mannerisms of Imam Ali (as):

1. He would never use deception and imposture in politics:

One of the characteristics of his politics is that it was free of any deception and trickery. The Commander of the Faithful ((عليه السلام).) has narrated: "If it were not for piety, I would be able to use tricks better than all deceitful Arabs." [al-Kafi, Volume 8, page 22] When comparing himself with Muawiyah, he says: "I swear to God that Muawiyah is not cleverer than me." [Nahjul Balaghah, Sermon 200] But what should Ali do, while he is committed to piety and morality when his hands and his tongue are tied?--This is the method of the Commander of the Faithful ((عليه السلام).).

2. He was patient and tolerant in practising politics:

3. Even with the enemies, he would speak with logic:

4. In politics, he would never resort to lying:

5. He would refute flattery:

6. He would not treat all his opponents the same:

He stood against Muawiyah as well. When they put the Holy Quran on their spears, the Commander of the Faithful said, "By Allah, this is a trick and deception. They do not believe in the Holy Quran.” And when Khawarij confronted him with their reliance on the outward aspects of religion, they recited the Holy Quran in a plaintive and sad tone in front of the Commander of the Faithful ((عليه السلام).), Hazrat stood up against them.

This discussion exemplifies the political behavior belonging to the Commander of the Faithful ((عليه السلام).). When we delve deeper, we see that the political behavior of that great Imam corresponds, exactly, with his spiritual behavior. In all capacities, the Commander of the Faithful ((عليه السلام).) is that same man, Ali ibn Abi Talib, who is peerless throughout the world.

https://english.khamenei.ir/news/5492/6-Acts-of-Imam-Ali-as-that-prove-politics-and-ethics-can-be

According to the Imam, a good governor is someone who dedicates himself to the service of the people, attend to the affairs of the weak and the poor, and take appropriate measures to combat such social ailments as bribery, corruption, injustice and insecurity. In one word, he would direct all his efforts in protecting human dignity of his citizens, and in dispensing justice and humanity in the society.

The letter of Imam Ali (a) to Malik al-Ashtar on the matter of governance entails all the basic philanthropic ideals and principles necessary for the effective enforcement of justice in the society. He truly did not leave anything unsaid in this regard and has informed us of all that was necessary for us to know.

Therefore, by following these directives of Imam Ali (a), the Muslim community can lay the foundations of an ideal society, which would then serve as an exemplar for other communities around the world.

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

He was offered the caliphhood on the condition he follows the way of Abu Bakr and Umar, and he rejected it. Even though at that point in time the most important thing that could happen in the world was Imam Ali (عليه السلام) becoming caliph, he rejected the position because in Islam the ends do not justify the means.

Allah knows what is wrong with you to try to be blind to the ocean of light that this man possesses, light that Sunnis also deeply appreciate. He was the hero of every battle, the third Muslim of all time, one of the Prophet (عليه السلام)'s earliest supporters, the husband of the Prophet (عليه السلام)'s daughter, assassinated while in salah, a depth of wisdom and knowledge, and you're sitting here trying to see him in a negative light. Not even the most bitter salafis and wahabis cross this line. Is it because you're jealous of him? Do you hate the truth itself? Allah knows what disease you have.

edit: We should also be careful when handling these agents. They always have ulterior motives. Maybe he means to mock us, to start a flame war, to insult us, to prey on the weak-minded. Whatever the case, don't take threads like these at the surface-level. 

Edited by guest 2025
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
48 minutes ago, hamz786 said:

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيم

As Salamu Alaykum. Thats an interesting perspective of the events that I have hardly heard. Out of curiosity could you point me to the references you've used regarding this perspective?
 
I thought the belief was that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) wasn't there for politics or political ambitions, and his aim was Islam first and foremost. I agree that yeah maybe we can grade Muawiyah more politically successful on those grounds (possibly even grade Imam Ali (عليه السلام) as not a good politician?). However I wonder, if Muawiyahs maneuvering can be considered as not really Islamic, and if Imam Ali (عليه السلام) refused to go in that direction and play the game, then who was really the better person here? 
 
Nontheless, it is something I have always thought about myself, the troubles of the Imam (عليه السلام) during his caliphate. I'm not knowledgeable enough but I hope one of the brothers or sisters here can continue your discussion InshaAllah
 

All what i have written are historical facts well established. You can read Tabari's history and he has narrated these events from various narrators.

I would not defend Maviya on theological lines. I think even the Sunnis are shy of doing so but the fact is Maviya had a different political theory which later became the established political foundation of the Ummayad Caliphate which is that Islam does not forbid hereditary kingship and that the Caliph has largely to use Ijtihad as a medium of statecraft , keeping the blunt use of religion aside. We can call it Secularism lite. Therefor i think it would be superfluous to judge Maviya's political actions on pure religious grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Administrators

There are so many errors in your understanding and analysis that i don't know where to begin.....

 

For example you mention Siffin.......so by your standards The Prophet also failed in his ways during Uhud where the muslims lost badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
31 minutes ago, guest 2025 said:

He was offered the caliphhood on the condition he follows the way of Abu Bakr and Umar, and he rejected it. Even though at that point in time the most important thing that could happen in the world was Imam Ali (عليه السلام) becoming caliph, he rejected the position because in Islam the ends do not justify the means.

Allah knows what is wrong with you to try to be blind to the ocean of light that this man possesses, light that Sunnis also deeply appreciate. He was the hero of every battle, the third Muslim of all time, one of the Prophet (عليه السلام)'s earliest supporters, the husband of the Prophet (عليه السلام)'s daughter, assassinated while in salah, a depth of wisdom and knowledge, and you're sitting here trying to see him in a negative light. Not even the most bitter salafis and wahabis cross this line. Is it because you're jealous of him? Do you hate the truth itself? Allah knows what disease you have.

I am just a seeker of knowledge so no offence sir. I have nothing against Imam Ali or anyone else. I merely want to see things the way they are , not the way i have been taught to see. I do not think so that a rational person can judge a historic personality by not humanizing him first. We all are humans , ambitious and emotional and we err. 

As far as Imam Ali rejecting Caliphate , that never happened. He desperately wanted it and during Abu Bakr and Omar era he stood no chance due to the stature of these two. He made all his efforts to become Caliph after Omar but the comitte head rejected him. He was angered and he castigated Abdur rahmna ibn awf in very strong words. 

After Uthman's selection , Ali famously remarked "What a betrayal and now i shall wait till that is written comes off". Ali then waited for the right opportunity and he along with other contenders Talhah and Zubayr instigated the rebellion against Uthman.

Caliphate was blood soaked and alarmingly controversial after Uthman but Imam Ali did seize the opportunity despite the fact that Hassan and Ibn Abbas requested him not to. Most of Uthman's killers were the pillars of Imam Ali's Caliphate like Malik alashtar , Kinana bin bashar , Muhammad bin abi bakr , Hakeem bin Jabala etc.

@Muslim2010

Edited by Leibniz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, root said:

There are so many errors in your understanding and analysis that i don't know where to begin.....

 

For example you mention Siffin.......so by your standards The Prophet also failed in his ways during Uhud where the muslims lost badly.

Muslims in Uhud lost militarily , Iman Ali lost in Siffin politically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
57 minutes ago, Leibniz said:

I am just a seeker of knowledge so no offence sir. I have nothing against Imam Ali or anyone else. I merely want to see things the way they are , not the way i have been taught to see. I do not think so that a rational person can judge a historic personality by not humanizing him first. We all are humans , ambitious and emotional and we err. 

As far as Imam Ali rejecting Caliphate , that never happened. He desperately wanted it and during Abu Bakr and Omar era he stood no chance due to the stature of these two. He made all his efforts to become Caliph after Omar but the comitte head rejected him. He was angered and he castigated Abdur rahmna ibn awf in very strong words. 

After Uthman's selection , Ali famously remarked "What a betrayal and now i shall wait till that is written comes off". Ali then waited for the right opportunity and he along with other contenders Talhah and Zubayr instigated the rebellion against Uthman.

Caliphate was blood soaked and alarmingly controversial after Uthman but Imam Ali did seize the opportunity despite the fact that Hassan and Ibn Abbas requested him not to. Most of Uthman's killers were the pillars of Imam Ali's Caliphate like Malik alashtar , Kinana bin bashar , Muhammad bin abi bakr , Hakeem bin Jabala etc.

@Muslim2010

You'll have to try harder than that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Administrators
1 hour ago, Leibniz said:

Muslims in Uhud lost militarily , Iman Ali lost in Siffin politically.

Muslims in Uhud lost because they didn't listen to the Prophets orders, they disobeyed him due to money and loot. Muslims in Siffin lost for the same exact reason in essence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
12 hours ago, Leibniz said:

I would not defend Maviya on theological lines. I think even the Sunnis are shy of doing so but the fact is Maviya had a different political theory which later became the established political foundation of the Ummayad Caliphate which is that Islam does not forbid hereditary kingship and that the Caliph has largely to use Ijtihad as a medium of statecraft , keeping the blunt use of religion aside. We can call it Secularism lite. Therefor i think it would be superfluous to judge Maviya's political actions on pure religious grounds.

Salam this is typical wahabi defending  of cursed Muawiah  by calling his rebel against legal caliph & causing deviation in Islam & misleading  muslims  by justifying  it as Ijtihad & justifying  his innovation  in religion & rulership by appointing  his cursed son as his successor  against  condition  of peace treaty with Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) for total destroying  of Islam which only sacrifice  of Imam  Hussain (عليه السلام) has saved Islam from total  destruction by enemies  of Islam likewise cursed Muawiah  & his cursed son &  successor .

18 hours ago, Leibniz said:

Imam Ali appointed Muhammad bin Abu Bakr as governor of Egypt in those precarious hours when Egypt was vital for Ali's Caliphate. Muhammad bin Abu Bakr (Imam Hassan used to call him Fasiq bin Abu Bakr) was himself a power hungry young lad and had no experience to handle a state like Egypt which was eyed upon by Maviya. Egypt fell with in a matter of days after Muhammad reached there just to get himself killed.

This is clearly a batalant  lie which just came out from deluded mind of a Nasibi (Enemy of Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) as common abusive language  & propaganda  of Wahabist against  Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام):blabla::angry::furious::dwarf:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam this is typical wahabi defending  of cursed Muawiah  by calling his rebel against legal caliph & causing deviation in Islam & misleading  muslims  by justifying  it as Ijtihad & justifying  his innovation  in religion & rulership by appointing  his cursed son as his successor  against  condition  of peace treaty with Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) for total destroying  of Islam which only sacrifice  of Imam  Hussain (عليه السلام) has saved Islam from total  destruction by enemies  of Islam likewise cursed Muawiah  & his cursed son &  successor .

This is clearly a batalant  lie which just came out from deluded mind of a Nasibi (Enemy of Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) as common abusive language  & propaganda  of Wahabist against  Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام):blabla::angry::furious::dwarf:

Whats the lie? Mention it and let me give you the references 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
34 minutes ago, Leibniz said:

Whats the lie? Mention it and let me give you the references 

you must provide a reference for your batalant lie not me because you have fabricated such nonsense about Imam Hasan (رضي الله عنه) & Muhammad ibn Abu bakr (رضي الله عنه) which every Shia knows him as loyal follower of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) which have good relation with Imam Hasan(عليه السلام)which you have fabricated a lie in name of Imam Hasan(عليه السلام) for humilation of Muhammad ibn Abu bakr (رضي الله عنه) then consequently Imam Ali(عليه السلام).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
50 minutes ago, Leibniz said:

let me give you the references 

 

Quote

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) says about him: "Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr was like a child to me and a brother to my children and the children of my brother Ja'far."

 

Quote

The words of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) after the martyrdom of Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr
When the news of the martyrdom of Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr and the joy of Mu'awiyah reached Imam Ali (عليه السلام), he said: "Our impatience is equal to their joy. I have not been impatient for a martyr like Muhammad in all my wars. He was my wife's child. I considered him my child and he loved me well. "That's why we are sad." Imam Ali ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) says in another place: "Indeed, our sorrow for the martyrdom of Muhammad is as great as the joy of the shamans, except that they  lost an enemy and  we lost a friend."

https://hawzah.net/fa/Magazine/View/3282/5775/58127/مناسبت-ها-شهادت-محمد-بن-ابی-بکر

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

https://www.islamquest.net/fa/archive/ar22038

https://snn.ir/fa/news/879634/مروری-بر-زندگی-شخصی-که-امیرالمومنین-او-را-پسر-خود-خواند-فرهنگ-حکمرانی-در-عهدنامه-محمدبن‌ابوبکر

https://www.mehrnews.com/news/2171147/توطئه-های-معاویه-در-مصر-چگونگی-شهادت-محمد-بن-ابوبکر-و-مالک-اشتر

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
26 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

you must provide a reference for your batalant lie not me because you have fabricated such nonsense about Imam Hasan (رضي الله عنه) & Muhammad ibn Abu bakr (رضي الله عنه) which every Shia knows him as loyal follower of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) which have good relation with Imam Hasan(عليه السلام)which you have fabricated a lie in name of Imam Hasan(عليه السلام) for humilation of Muhammad ibn Abu bakr (رضي الله عنه) then consequently Imam Ali(عليه السلام).

It has been widely reported to Al Hassan used to refer to Muhammad bin Abi bakr as Fasiq bin abi bakr. For example in ibn Saad's Tabqaat Kabir أخبرنا : عمرو بن عاصم الكلابي قال : ، أخبرنا : أبو الأشهب قال : ، أخبرنا : الحسن قال : لما أدركوا بالعقوبة ، يعني قتلة عثمان بن عفان ، قال : أخذ الفاسق إبن أبي بكر ، قال أبو الأشهب : وكان الحسن لا يسميه بإسمه إنما كان يسميه الفاسق ، قال : فأخذ فجعل في جوف حمار ثم أحرق عليه

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Borntowitness
22 hours ago, Leibniz said:

One can not ignore the fact while going through history that Imam Ali made some very catastrophic decisions during his short political career. He was encountered by none other than Abdullah Ibn Abbas and Imam Hassan for such decisions. Right after the murder  of Uthman , Ali is seen as a power hungry man with very little political acumen who is haphazardly acting around till his death. 

He first tried to dethrone Maviya by asking Abdullah Ibn Abbas to go to Damascus and take over governorship from Maviya. Ibn Abbas was taken aback by this proposal. Perplexed  and shocked he asked if Ali was serious about it and warned Imam Ali of the political consequences but Ali refused to listen.

Imam Ali appointed Muhammad bin Abu Bakr as governor of Egypt in those precarious hours when Egypt was vital for Ali's Caliphate. Muhammad bin Abu Bakr (Imam Hassan used to call him Fasiq bin Abu Bakr) was himself a power hungry young lad and had no experience to handle a state like Egypt which was eyed upon by Maviya. Egypt fell with in a matter of days after Muhammad reached there just to get himself killed.

Imam Ali could not keep his ranks assembled during Siffain and one portion of his xie hard supporters left him on the matter of Tehkeem. This group which later came to be known as Khawarij , not only diluted the military strength of Imam Ali but one Kharijite eventually killed Imam Ali as well.

Imam Ali had lost popular support in his bastion Kufa by his last days. His last sermons in Kufa are filled with his self castigatings and condemnations of the people of Kufa. Tabari has recorded a shocking event in which Imam Ali announces Jihad from the pulpit in Kufa and went out to Nukhela waiting for Kufans to arrive. He waited there for a whole day and literally no one came out to join him.

These are just a few short examples of Imam Ali's political decisions. One can quote dozens of more such examples from his political career. Maviya on the other hand emerged victorious due to his unparalleled political wisdom and immaculate decision making capability. 

1. Imam Ali's decisions were not catastrophic but eye opening as to how much the state that was so-called Islamic was unislamic in nature. His aim was not to fill bellys but to awaken sleeping conscience that you mistakenly wrote as catastrophic rather they were planned to such an accuracy that you could differentiate how much the state deviated from the path of Prophet Muhammad (s) that people come to question his decisions for which Prophet said haq goes where Ali goes.

2. Ibn Abbas was thinking like an ordinary political thinker would think by keeping dunia in mind but Imam Ali's thinking was in accordance with the Shariah who thought that even being silent at the atrocities of his officials, will be considered sin in the eyes of Allah (عزّ وجلّ). Whom should Ali have followed Allah or people. Your answer should be Allah not people because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) obeys Allah (عزّ وجلّ).

3. Imam Ali (عليه السلام) raised Muhammad bin Abu bakar and used to say about him that Muhammad is my Son even though his blood is from Hazrat Abu bakar so you claim that Imam said him such and such things is false. Muhammad bin Abu bakar was a fine candidate for Egypt. He did not fail in Egypt rather he was martyred and was successful one rather the failure was of people who failed to support him because of wealth.

4. Imam Ali's supporters didnot leave him in siffin rather it were the supporters of Abu Musa Ashri and the likes of him who took money from Muwaiya ibn Abu Sufyan to save him from being killed. It was same Abu Musa Ashri who addressed Muwavia as Ameenullah in later years for wealth and position. If they had been Imam Ali's supporters, they should have fought the battle instead of uttering excuses. 

5. Kufa was ruled previously by Abu Musa Ashri, it was a buffer zone protecting Muavia ibn Abu Sufyan. Imam Ali had no support in Kufa in the first place that is why he made it his headquarter to fight banu ummaya. If Abu Musa Ashri had played its role as true Muslim, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) would not have moved there. And point to be noted, Imam Ali's position was not fragile that he would have lost the war, rather he was accumulating army against Ummayads. Had he be not martyred, he would have vanquished Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan. 

These are small details that I have mentioned. Imam Ali (عليه السلام) understood Muawiya and Abu Musa Ashri's collaboration that's why he settled in Kufa while all other provinces were in harmony it was only Syria that was causing problems and rejected a Khalifa and fought a Khaliah nominated by Muslims which was wrong act both in terms of religion and world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
22 hours ago, Leibniz said:

These are just a few short examples of Imam Ali's political decisions. One can quote dozens of more such examples from his political career. Maviya on the other hand emerged victorious due to his unparalleled political wisdom and immaculate decision making capability. 

Through your eyes you see what happened as it being a "political failure", whereas Imam Ali (عليه السلام) stood firmly by his principles and would not compromise them for political self-gain, he did not want to involve himself in the game of political deception just like muawiya and his bunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
31 minutes ago, Berber-Shia said:

Through your eyes you see what happened as it being a "political failure", whereas Imam Ali (عليه السلام) stood firmly by his principles and would not compromise them for political self-gain, he did not want to involve himself in the game of political deception just like muawiya and his bunch.

Imam Ali did involve in politics and he tried the best of his manoeuvres too , like Maviya but failed. Its not as if Iman Ali was straight as an arrow in politics. He did what the rest ( Maviya , Ayesha , Zubayr , Talhah) were doing ie gathering political support by any means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

All for politics , Imam Ali teamed up with Ziyad bin Abihi as well (father of Obaydullah ibn Ziyad). Ziyad was a irreligious cruel and notorious man born out of wedlock and later joined Maviya. So its not like this that Imam Ali did not play politics , he did but Maviya outsmarted him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
17 hours ago, Leibniz said:

Caliphate was blood soaked and alarmingly controversial after Uthman but Imam Ali did seize the opportunity despite the fact that Hassan and Ibn Abbas requested him not to. Most of Uthman's killers were the pillars of Imam Ali's Caliphate like Malik alashtar , Kinana bin bashar , Muhammad bin abi bakr , Hakeem bin Jabala etc.

@Muslim2010

History testifies that those influential people who were the key element in agitation against Uthman include Talha, Zubair, Aisha (the mother of believers), Abdurrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas (the army commander of Muawiyah).

A) Talha

Talha Ibn Ubaydillah was one of the biggest agitator against Uthman and was the one who plotted his murder. He then used that incident for revenge against ‘Ali by starting the first civil war in the history of Islam (i.e., the battle of Camel).

Abzay said: I witnessed the day they went in against Uthman. They entered the house through an opening in the residence of Amr Ibn Hazm. There was a skirmishing and they got in. By God, I have not forgotten that Sudan Ibn Humran came out and I heard him say: "Where is Talha Ibn Ubaydillah? We have killed Ibn Affan!”

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p200

Marwan Ibn al-Hakam who was in the ranks of Talha, saw Talha is retreating (when his army was being defeated in the battlefield). Since he and all Umayad recognized him and al-Zubair as the murderers of Uthman, he shot an arrow at him and severely wounded him. He then said to Aban, the son of Uthman, that: "I have spared you from one of your father’s murderers.”Talha was taken to a ruined house in Basra where he died.

References:

- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’ad, v3, part 1, p159

B) Al-Zubair

al-Zuhri, another important Sunni narrator who is famous for his dislike of Ahlul-Bayt, reported the following dialogue of Imam ‘Ali with Zubair and Talha before the start of battle of Camel:

"‘Ali said: ‘Zubair, do you fight me for the blood of Uthman after you killed him? May God give the most hostile to Uthman among us the consequence which that very person dislikes.’ He said to Talha:

‘Talha, you have brought the wife of the Messenger of God (Aisha) to use her for war and hid your wife at your house (in Medina)! Did you not give me your allegiance?’ Talha said: ‘I gave you the allegiance while the sword was on my neck.’

Reference: History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH v4, p905

C) Aisha

Talha and Zubair were not the only collaborators against Uthman. Sunni history tells us that Talha’s cousin, Aisha, was collaborating and campaigning against Uthman as well. The following paragraph also from the History of al-Tabari shows the cooperation of Aisha with Talha in overthrowing Uthman:

While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: "O’ Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them. I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr.”Ibn Abbas said: "O’ Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, ‘Ali).”Aisha replied: "Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you."

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

Many Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (sa). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:

"Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever."

References:

- History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206

D) Amr Ibn Al-Aas

Amr Ibn al-Aas (the number 2 person in the government of Muawiyah) was one of the most dangerous agitators against Uthman and he had all the reasons to conspire against him. He was the governor of Egypt during the reign of the second Caliph. However, the third Caliph dismissed him and replaced him with his foster brother, Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abu Sharh. As a result of this, Amr became extremely hostile towards Uthman.

According to Tabari, when Uthman was besieged, Amr settled in the palace of al-Ajlan and used to ask from people about the situation of Uthman: ..Amr had not left his seat before a second rider passed by. Amr called him out: "How is Uthman doing?”The man replied: "He has been killed.”Amr then said: "I am Abu Abdillah. When I scratch an ulcer, I cut it off. (i.e., when I desire an object, I attain it). I have been provoking (people) against him, even the shepherd on the top of mountains with his flock.”

Then Salamah Ibn Rawh said to him: "You, the Qurai[Edited Out]es, have broken a strong tie between yourselves and the Arabs. Why did you do that?”Amr replied: "We wanted to draw the truth out of the pit of falsehood, and to have people be on an equal footing as regards the truth.”

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 171-172

The divider of Muslims ignored what is well known in the history of Islam which was reported by important Sunni reporters. The revolt against Uthman was as a result of the efforts of influential companions in Medina, such as Aisha, Talha, Zubair, Aburrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas. The murder of Uthman provided a nice scapegoat for those who were fighting over more power, while serving under the government of Uthman. They were mainly his relatives, the Umayad, such as Muawiyah and Marwan, who thoroughly took advantage of Uthman’s life as well as his death.

Imam ‘Ali said in the battle of Camel:

"Truth and falsehood can not be identified by the virtue of people. First understand the truth, you will then realize who is adhering to it.”(Nahjul Balaghah, by Imam ‘Ali)

https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia/companions-who-murdered-uthman

Thus all your statements are just false conjectures baseless and without any evidence, these conjectures against Imam Ali (عليه السلام) stand rejected.

wasalam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Borntowitness
44 minutes ago, Leibniz said:

Imam Ali did involve in politics and he tried the best of his manoeuvres too , like Maviya but failed. Its not as if Iman Ali was straight as an arrow in politics. He did what the rest ( Maviya , Ayesha , Zubayr , Talhah) were doing ie gathering political support by any means.

You are very unfair in this debate because there are reports where Imam Ali (عليه السلام) did not relieve the rich from paying poor-rate even though people said not to levy zakaat until his government was consolidated. 

Your problem is that you can find atrocities committed by others but not from Imam Ali (عليه السلام) so you want him to be like others but unfortunately you have no source to back up your claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Borntowitness
49 minutes ago, Leibniz said:

All for politics , Imam Ali teamed up with Ziyad bin Abihi as well (father of Obaydullah ibn Ziyad). Ziyad was a irreligious cruel and notorious man born out of wedlock and later joined Maviya. So its not like this that Imam Ali did not play politics , he did but Maviya outsmarted him

Ziyad was born our of wedlock. What is your proof. It is haram for a person to be Imam and lead prayer if he is born out of wedlock. Our proof is Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that appointed him as governor of persia because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was gifted with hidden knowledge and was aware of parentage of all humans. Your claim is, therefore, weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Guest Borntowitness said:

Ziyad was born our of wedlock. What is your proof. It is haram for a person to be Imam and lead prayer if he is born out of wedlock. Our proof is Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that appointed him as governor of persia because Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was gifted with hidden knowledge and was aware of parentage of all humans. Your claim is, therefore, weak.

You are just speaking your belief. You believe that Imam Ali had knowledge of the unseen and what not and so it has become an objective reality just because you believe that. Ziyad was born out of wedlock and after having enjoyed Ali's patronage for some time , Ziyad shifted loyalities to Maviya. Muaviya had "honored" Ziyad by claiming that Ziyad infact was son of Abu Sufyan , fornication that Abu Sufyan had done long ago. Ziyad then used to refer to himself as Ziyad bin abu Sufyan

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Ziyad_b._Abih

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

8 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

History testifies that those influential people who were the key element in agitation against Uthman include Talha, Zubair, Aisha (the mother of believers), Abdurrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas (the army commander of Muawiyah).

A) Talha

Talha Ibn Ubaydillah was one of the biggest agitator against Uthman and was the one who plotted his murder. He then used that incident for revenge against ‘Ali by starting the first civil war in the history of Islam (i.e., the battle of Camel).

Abzay said: I witnessed the day they went in against Uthman. They entered the house through an opening in the residence of Amr Ibn Hazm. There was a skirmishing and they got in. By God, I have not forgotten that Sudan Ibn Humran came out and I heard him say: "Where is Talha Ibn Ubaydillah? We have killed Ibn Affan!”

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, p200

Marwan Ibn al-Hakam who was in the ranks of Talha, saw Talha is retreating (when his army was being defeated in the battlefield). Since he and all Umayad recognized him and al-Zubair as the murderers of Uthman, he shot an arrow at him and severely wounded him. He then said to Aban, the son of Uthman, that: "I have spared you from one of your father’s murderers.”Talha was taken to a ruined house in Basra where he died.

References:

- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’ad, v3, part 1, p159

B) Al-Zubair

al-Zuhri, another important Sunni narrator who is famous for his dislike of Ahlul-Bayt, reported the following dialogue of Imam ‘Ali with Zubair and Talha before the start of battle of Camel:

"‘Ali said: ‘Zubair, do you fight me for the blood of Uthman after you killed him? May God give the most hostile to Uthman among us the consequence which that very person dislikes.’ He said to Talha:

‘Talha, you have brought the wife of the Messenger of God (Aisha) to use her for war and hid your wife at your house (in Medina)! Did you not give me your allegiance?’ Talha said: ‘I gave you the allegiance while the sword was on my neck.’

Reference: History of al-Tabari, Arabic version, Events of year 36 AH v4, p905

C) Aisha

Talha and Zubair were not the only collaborators against Uthman. Sunni history tells us that Talha’s cousin, Aisha, was collaborating and campaigning against Uthman as well. The following paragraph also from the History of al-Tabari shows the cooperation of Aisha with Talha in overthrowing Uthman:

While Ibn Abbas was setting out for Mecca, he found Aisha in al-Sulsul (seven miles south of Medina). Aisha said: "O’ Ibn Abbas, I appeal to you by God, to abandon this man (Uthman) and sow doubt about him among the people, for you have been given a sharp tongue. (By the current siege over Uthman) people have shown their understanding, and light is raised to guide them. I have seen Talha has taken the possession of the keys to the public treasuries and storehouses. If he becomes Caliph (after Uthman), he will follow the path of his parental cousin Abu-Bakr.”Ibn Abbas said: "O’ Mother (of believers), if something happens to that man (i.e., Uthman), people would seek asylum only with our companion (namely, ‘Ali).”Aisha replied: "Be quiet! I have no desire to defy or quarrel with you."

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 238-239

Many Sunni historian reported that Once Aisha went to Uthman and asked for her share of inheritance of Prophet (after so many years passed from the death of Prophet). Uthman refrained to give Aisha any money by reminding her that she was one those who testified and encouraged Abu-Bakr to refrain to pay the share of inheritance of Fatimah (sa). So if Fatimah does not have any share of inheritance, then why should she? Aisha became extremely angry at Uthman, and came out saying:

"Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever."

References:

- History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206

D) Amr Ibn Al-Aas

Amr Ibn al-Aas (the number 2 person in the government of Muawiyah) was one of the most dangerous agitators against Uthman and he had all the reasons to conspire against him. He was the governor of Egypt during the reign of the second Caliph. However, the third Caliph dismissed him and replaced him with his foster brother, Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abu Sharh. As a result of this, Amr became extremely hostile towards Uthman.

According to Tabari, when Uthman was besieged, Amr settled in the palace of al-Ajlan and used to ask from people about the situation of Uthman: ..Amr had not left his seat before a second rider passed by. Amr called him out: "How is Uthman doing?”The man replied: "He has been killed.”Amr then said: "I am Abu Abdillah. When I scratch an ulcer, I cut it off. (i.e., when I desire an object, I attain it). I have been provoking (people) against him, even the shepherd on the top of mountains with his flock.”

Then Salamah Ibn Rawh said to him: "You, the Qurai[Edited Out]es, have broken a strong tie between yourselves and the Arabs. Why did you do that?”Amr replied: "We wanted to draw the truth out of the pit of falsehood, and to have people be on an equal footing as regards the truth.”

Reference: History of al-Tabari, English version, v15, pp 171-172

The divider of Muslims ignored what is well known in the history of Islam which was reported by important Sunni reporters. The revolt against Uthman was as a result of the efforts of influential companions in Medina, such as Aisha, Talha, Zubair, Aburrahman Ibn Ouf, and Amr Ibn al-Aas. The murder of Uthman provided a nice scapegoat for those who were fighting over more power, while serving under the government of Uthman. They were mainly his relatives, the Umayad, such as Muawiyah and Marwan, who thoroughly took advantage of Uthman’s life as well as his death.

Imam ‘Ali said in the battle of Camel:

"Truth and falsehood can not be identified by the virtue of people. First understand the truth, you will then realize who is adhering to it.”(Nahjul Balaghah, by Imam ‘Ali)

https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia/companions-who-murdered-uthman

Thus all your statements are just false conjectures baseless and without any evidence, these conjectures against Imam Ali (عليه السلام) stand rejected.

wasalam

There is alot of circumstanial evidence and countless narrations which implicate Imam Ali in the murder of Uthman. Pick Umar ibn Shabbah's Tareekh al madina and you shall find those narrations in one place. The killing of Uthman is not the topic otherwise i would have dwelled deeper into it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Calling Imam Ali AS a failed politician is same as claiming Elbert Einstein wasn’t a great physicist & mathematician just because he didn’t participate in Manhattan Project of first nuclear weapon production (no comparison but you get the point). 
 

Of course Imam Ali AS being one of the most perfect humans of all times didn’t participate in thievery, bribery, murders, assassinations, and power grabs … your kingship is lower to me than the snot of a goat (Imam’s words, not mine). 
 

In my assessment, Imam Ali thrived as the politician, because his goal wasn’t conquering barren and fertile lands, lousy and good looking castles, or shiny and glittering metals and rocks. His goal was to establish and spread the true and last religion of Allah, which he did superbly. He played the long game so to say, and is still winning at it. Look how a religion he took over after the demise of the Prophet of Allah, with barely a dozen adherents at the time of the murder of his beloved wife, he turned it into a religion of over 300 million strong free men and women, who adore him, his Prophet, and their Lord, and their numbers are still growing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
18 hours ago, Leibniz said:

It has been widely reported to Al Hassan used to refer to Muhammad bin Abi bakr as Fasiq bin abi bakr. For example in ibn Saad's Tabqaat Kabir أخبرنا : عمرو بن عاصم الكلابي قال : ، أخبرنا : أبو الأشهب قال : ، أخبرنا : الحسن قال : لما أدركوا بالعقوبة ، يعني قتلة عثمان بن عفان ، قال : أخذ الفاسق إبن أبي بكر ، قال أبو الأشهب : وكان الحسن لا يسميه بإسمه إنما كان يسميه الفاسق ، قال : فأخذ فجعل في جوف حمار ثم أحرق عليه

This is clearly an ummayid propaganda of cursed Muawiah (la) against  Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) & loyal companions  of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) which burning body of martyr  Muhammad  ibn Abubakr  (رضي الله عنه) inside sikn of donkey has been war crime of cursed Muawiah (la) & his companion Amr ibn Aas(la) which they have accused Imam Ali(عليه السلام) & his followers  to killing of Uthman for justifying  their atrocities  against  them .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Borntowitness
10 hours ago, Leibniz said:

You are just speaking your belief. You believe that Imam Ali had knowledge of the unseen and what not and so it has become an objective reality just because you believe that. Ziyad was born out of wedlock and after having enjoyed Ali's patronage for some time , Ziyad shifted loyalities to Maviya. Muaviya had "honored" Ziyad by claiming that Ziyad infact was son of Abu Sufyan , fornication that Abu Sufyan had done long ago. Ziyad then used to refer to himself as Ziyad bin abu Sufyan

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Ziyad_b._Abih

My belief is through people's own recognition of the fact that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) had miracles with him and for that you can turn to books by reading how he raised door of khyber and how he used to unite parents with children through his miraculous Judgments. The problem with ziyad was that he did not know his father or to him is father bore no fame in the society as this was big thing in Arab society.

It is to be noted that when a text is against sunnah of Prophet or Imam, Sunnah is preferred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

1. Were Imam Ali (عليه السلام) or Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) came to this world to be elected politicians?

2. Or to guide humans with the commands of God?

If the purpose was #2, then to be elected by people and be a politician is not a criteria in the presence of God, but it is relevant in the eyes of people who elected these politicians.

So @Leibniz, your personal opinion on who was a successful/failed elected politician don't carry any weight in the eye of Islam.

Whether Prophet Noah (عليه السلام) has followers who want to elect him as a leader or not, he still built the ship and follow what Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) instructed him to do.

If you want degrade the status of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) to a level of human made politician so you can criticize him like ordinary humans, then go ahead.  You are directly against the teachings of Quran and the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

As for us, the early muslims missed the opportunity to make Imam Ali (عليه السلام) as their first elected leader after the wafat of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

@Leibniz, you also given the opportunity to accept or acknowledge Imam Ali(عليه السلام) to be elected the first person to lead the Ummah after the wafat of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).  Infact, all muslim until before the Qiamat are given the same opportunity.  Take you pick.

In the hereafter, when all humans are gathered in the Presence of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will ask us who will be our leader (Imam) after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) that will lead individual muslim to Him(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  You can answer your favorite elected and successful politicians.  We will answer Imam Ali (عليه السلام).  See who Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will agreed upon.

Verse 71 of Surah Israa (chapter 17 of the Holy Quran) refers:

يَوْمَ نَدْعُو كُلَّ أُنَاسٍ بِإِمَامِهِمْ ۖ فَمَنْ أُوتِيَ كِتَابَهُ بِيَمِينِهِ فَأُولَٰئِكَ يَقْرَءُونَ كِتَابَهُمْ وَلَا يُظْلَمُونَ فَتِيلًا
One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams: those who are given their record in their right hand will read it (with pleasure), and they will not be dealt with unjustly in the least.

Verse 71 of Surah Israa (chapter 17) noted above:

يَوْمَ نَدْعُو كُلَّ أُنَاسٍ بِإِمَامِهِمْ ۖ
One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 1/16/2022 at 1:36 PM, Leibniz said:

There is alot of circumstanial evidence and countless narrations which implicate Imam Ali in the murder of Uthman. Pick Umar ibn Shabbah's Tareekh al madina and you shall find those narrations in one place. The killing of Uthman is not the topic otherwise i would have dwelled deeper into it

Balloon has been busted.

1567240331_baloonburst.jpg.7bd65cf14236f0970d7d367203cd320f.jpg

:clap:

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Let's praise Imam Ali (عليه السلام) in this space which was constructed to defile him:

He was the first man to accept Islam

He fought for the Prophet (عليه السلام) in every battle except one, and was the hero of every battle

He laid his own life on the line countless times in order to preserve the life of the final Messenger of Allah

He was worthy of marrying the Prophet's daughter, Fatimatul Zahraa (عليه السلام)

He memorized the Quran and was the first person to make it into a book

He was assassinated during salah

Nevermind Imam Ali (عليه السلام), imagine there was a different man who fought in multiple Islamic wars, had his marriage arranged by the Prophet (عليه السلام), was a hafiz, was killed during salah. What mental illness would you have to have in order to look at a person like this and think "Hmmmm, I'm going to try to find a flaw in them." 

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...