Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

The Case Against Abu Bakr by Fatima Zahra (as)

Rate this topic


Mohamad_ali

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

The purpose of this brief is to have my brothers and sisters in islam review, add, clarify and question my logic in the case I bring forward against Abu Bakr as the first Caliph. I do not wish to denigrate the man, only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows his heart and his intentions. All we have is the events agreed upon by the most prominent Islamic scholars from across the spectrum of sects, Theologies and historical writings.

The premise is simple, in order for Abu Bakr to be rightly guided, his term as Caliph must have been accepted by Fatima (عليه السلام) according to Sunni Accepted Hadith and Quran. I plan to show that ... 

  1. Within the accepted Sunna Books it is agreed that whoever dies without being bound by allegiance to the Imam of their time dies an apostate or Jahiliyya.
    • It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: One who defected from obedience (to the Amir) and separated from the main body of the Muslims - if he died in that state-would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya (i.e. would not die as a Muslim)...

      Sahih Muslim 1848a

  2. Each person on day of judgement will be judged under the flag of the imam they gave their allegiance to.
     
    • Quran 17:71 يَوْمَ نَدْعُوا۟ كُلَّ أُنَاسٍۭ بِإِمَـٰمِهِمْ ۖ فَمَنْ أُوتِىَ كِتَـٰبَهُۥ بِيَمِينِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ يَقْرَءُونَ كِتَـٰبَهُمْ وَلَا يُظْلَمُونَ فَتِيلًا - The Day will surely come when We shall summon every people with their leader (Imami'him). Then those who are given their records in their right hands will read their records [eagerly] and shall not in the least be wronged:
       
  3. After the death of The Prophet ﷺ there was disagreement over who would assume the leadership of the Umma as both Political and Religious leader (Caliph & Imam)
  4. Anyone who did not give allegiance/Bay'a to the Caliph/Imam was therefore considered an apostate, and the penalty was Death.
  5. So if after the Prophet ﷺ the Imam/Religious Authority over all Muslims is Abu Bakr, then all who did not give allegiance to Abu Bakr are considered Jahiliyya / apostate. (this was the reason for the Ridda/Apostate Wars)
  6. The Prophet said 

    Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

    Sahih al-Bukhari 3714

    `A'isha reported ... she Fatima (عليه السلام) said that he (the Holy Prophet) told her ... Aren't you pleased that you should be the sovereign amongst the believing women or the head of women of this Ummah? And this made me laugh. Sahih Muslim 2450c

  7. When Fatima(عليه السلام) died she died unhappy with Abu Bakr 

    So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not talk to him till she died. Sahih al-Bukhari 4240
     
  8. Fatima(عليه السلام) also refused to give Bay'a/Allegiance to Abu Bakr.
  9. If the Hadith and ruling above are taken as accurate, then Fatima(عليه السلام) according to Sunni hadith died a Jahilliyya/apostate because she did not have an imam.
  10. That is not possible because we either have to accept that the Prophet ﷺ was wrong in saying that Fatima (عليه السلام) would be in heaven, or she did give allegiance/Bay'a to her Imam. 
  11. The Prophet ﷺ can not be wrong, and we all agree on that (i hope) so Fatima(عليه السلام) must be in heaven.
  12. Fatima did not give Allegiance/Bay'a to Abu Bakr, so which Imam did she give her allegiance to?
  13. The only Imam she could have given allegiance to is the rightful successor to the Prophet ﷺ.
  14. That could not be Abu Bakr because she not only died unhappy with him, she also refused to give Bay'a
  15. The only person she would give her Bay'a to and was making the argument for as the leader after her father ﷺ was Ali(عليه السلام).
  16. So he must be the Rightfully appointed imam
  17. Now after her death, Ali(عليه السلام) gave Bay'a to Abu Bakr.
  18. Did that legitimize Abu Bakr's position?
  19. The argument was always that Ali(عليه السلام) was appointed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), so only Allah could take that away.
  20. Ali(عليه السلام) Bay'a was acceptance of Abu Bakr as Calipha (political leader) not his Imama.

Please tear this apart if you think its wrong, add to it if you have relevant references, and correct it if you think it is lacking. The goal of this is not to elevate the position of Ali(عليه السلام), we could not come close to giving him what was ordained to him Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). The goal is to have a constructive conversation around the leadership after the demise of the Prophet ﷺ for the purpose of informing our choices today and bridging the gap in our collective understanding as muslims.  The mission of The Prophet ﷺ, his sacrifices to bring mercy to mankind is in our hands and we have to find a way to move his mission forward. Not for worldly power, but for the mercy that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) showed humanity by sending us Hal'Nabey ﷺ & The Quran.

I have used Sunni reference because I generally believe that in order to bring people to your perspective you have to start from an agreed position. I don't think that as Shi'a we would disagree with the general message even if we disagree with the entire ref hadith

Salam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
12 hours ago, Mohamad_ali said:

Now after her death, Ali(عليه السلام) gave Bay'a to Abu Bakr.

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) never gave allegiance to Abu Bakar. This is proved by Khutba-e-Shaqshaqia and the decision of the Shura that elected Usman because Usman was made caliph on the condition of following Sunnah of two caliphs while Imam Ali (عليه السلام) denied it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) never gave allegiance to Abu Bakar. This is proved by Khutba-e-Shaqshaqia and the decision of the Shura that elected Usman because Usman was made caliph on the condition of following Sunnah of two caliphs while Imam Ali (عليه السلام) denied it.

Can you explain further, do we have any other ref?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Mohamad_ali said:

Can you explain further, do we have any other ref?

It should be me who should ask first that in which shia book you found that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) paid allegiance to Hazrat Abu Bakar.

Nevertheless, I provide you two references:

One is Nehjul Balagha, Khutba-e-Shaqshaqia

https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-3-allah-son-abu-quhafah

Other is following thread which contains reference to why was Imam Ali (عليه السلام) not elected and Hazrat Usman was given caliphate:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The case of Syeda Fatima s.a agains Abu Bakr was such a case that separate falsehood with truth.

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has commanded to follow the path of some people in Al-Fatiha:

صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ

(The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors)

If this ayat remained at this point people may not know the truth. So the verse moves ahead to further describe the traits of those upon whom Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has bestowed favors:

غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ 

Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray.

Syeda Fatima's s.a case not only proves Abu Bakr as مغضوب but also proved him from among الضَّالِّينَ.

The reason why he is maghdoob can be understood from the following sahih narration:

فاطِمَةُ بَضْعَةٌ مِنِّي، فمَن أغْضَبَها أغْضَبَنِي.

الراوي : المسور بن مخرمة | المحدث : البخاري | المصدر : صحيح البخاري | الصفحة أو الرقم : 3767 | خلاصة حكم المحدث : [صحيح] | التخريج : أخرجه البخاري (3714)، ومسلم (2449)

And the one who angered Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has infact angered Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). The one who cause distress to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is cursed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى):

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا مُّهِينًا

33:57

Although these two also sufficient for establishing him as الضَّالِّينَ but I am giving here another reason. 

Syeda Fatima s.a is from the certified sadiqeen as she is the one who went with Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in mubahila and the divine command for all the believers is this:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَكُونُوا مَعَ الصَّادِقِينَ {119}

[Shakir 9:119] O you who believe! be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones.

So Abu Bakr appeared as liar and a person who gone astray. So Abu Bakr's & Umar's way must not to be followed. Now you can get the idea why Imam Ali (عليه السلام) refused the clause presented to him at the time of election of 3rd caliph:

هل أنت مبايعي على كتاب الله وسنة نبيه (ص) وفعل أبي بكر وعمر ؟

Kitab Allah & Sunnah of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are apparently seems two but are actually one thing. The clear refusal of the 3rd clause by Imam Ali (عليه السلام) is sufficient to further strengthen that the way (sirat) and actions of these must not be followed. 

This is the Jihad of Syeda Fatima s.a, and She clearly defeated these two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 8/19/2022 at 3:27 AM, Mohamad_ali said:
  1. After the death of The Prophet ﷺ there was disagreement over who would assume the leadership of the Umma as both Political and Religious leader (Caliph & Imam)
  2. Anyone who did not give allegiance/Bay'a to the Caliph/Imam was therefore considered an apostate, and the penalty was Death.
  3. So if after the Prophet ﷺ the Imam/Religious Authority over all Muslims is Abu Bakr, then all who did not give allegiance to Abu Bakr are considered Jahiliyya / apostate. (this was the reason for the Ridda/Apostate Wars)
  4. The Prophet said 

    Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

    Sahih al-Bukhari 3714

    `A'isha reported ... she Fatima (عليه السلام) said that he (the Holy Prophet) told her ... Aren't you pleased that you should be the sovereign amongst the believing women or the head of women of this Ummah? And this made me laugh. Sahih Muslim 2450c

  5. When Fatima(عليه السلام) died she died unhappy with Abu Bakr 

    So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not talk to him till she died. Sahih al-Bukhari 4240
     
  6. Fatima(عليه السلام) also refused to give Bay'a/Allegiance to Abu Bakr.
  7. If the Hadith and ruling above are taken as accurate, then Fatima(عليه السلام) according to Sunni hadith died a Jahilliyya/apostate because she did not have an imam

The following are clear replies to the false conjectures that you made by copy pasting from some website:

1-  We do not consider Abu bakr as legitimate successor of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). If otherwise you think then Please quote  a single verse of quran where it is mentioned in clear words that the people can choose a successor / caliph of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) instead it is appointed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) for the guidance of the ummah, before i can give a weight-age to you assumption that he Abu bakr was a nominated successor of the prophet. It is rejected in clear words.

2- Fatima SSAA died as she was not happy with Abu bakr because of the atrocities the first and second caliph of Muslims made her unhappy, You may like to see the incident of door from the history.

3-  What is the virtues of the Ahl albayat of the prophet saw , you may like to see the verses of Quran known as verse of purification (33:33) that mentions that all kind of rijs / blemishes have been kept away from ahlalbayt , In sunni hadith these include 5 personalities including the prophet, Imam Ali, Fatima saa, Imam Hasan and Imam Husain (عليه السلام)..

Moreover the virtues of the Ahl albayt as is also exhibited by the verse of Mubahila 3:61. 

فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars. (3:61)

Thus it is obvious that whoever comes against the Ahl alabayt (عليه السلام) is a defined liar as per above verse of quran.

Ahl alabayt as, are the standard reference of truth. For us whoever came against the prophet, Imam Ali, Fatima Zahra, Imam Hasan and Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) they  were liars.

wasalam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 8/19/2022 at 3:27 AM, Mohamad_ali said:
  1. Now after her death, Ali(عليه السلام) gave Bay'a to Abu Bakr.
  2. Did that legitimize Abu Bakr's position?

The answer comes in response is simple.

Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) did not give baya to yazeed La who was a people chosen claiph/

Imam Hassan as did not give a baya to Muawiya who was a people chosen / selected claiph.

Imam Ali did not give a baya to the people chosen caliphs.

Fatima Zahra did not give a baya to the people chosen caliphs.

The answer is complete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

1-  We do not consider Abu bakr as legitimate successor of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). If otherwise you think then Please quote  a single verse of quran where it is mentioned in clear words that the people can choose a successor / caliph of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) instead it is appointed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) for the guidance of the ummah, before i can give a weight-age to you assumption that he Abu bakr was a nominated successor of the prophet. It is rejected in clear words.

 

I don't consider him legitimate at all. I believe I have shown, using methods & text agreed by our Sunni Brothers and Sisters, that even by their own logic he was wrong in assuming power ahead of Ali(عليه السلام). I don't need to prove to the Shia his appointment is inconsistent with the Quran and Sunna because we already believe that. Once we agree the appointment was inconsistent with the Quran and Sunna we don't need to discus the process because the process becomes illegitimate.

 

7 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

2- Fatima SSAA died as she was not happy with Abu bakr because of the atrocities the first and second caliph of Muslims made her unhappy, You may like to see the incident of door from the history.

The incident of the door is not agreed upon by "majority" sunni sources even though there are some who have narrated it in detail in historical test. Further more there are Shia scholars who question the details of the event. As such I did not use the event. Fatima(عليه السلام) died unhappy with Abu Bakr, this is attested to by A'isha in Bukhari to the extent that she died, was buried at night, did not want him or his companions there and her grave location is unknown to this day. 

I believe we both arrive at the same conclusion. The appointment by AbuBakr as Caliph was illegitimate, the process, the next Caliph (Ummar) and all the events that follow stem from this. 

I'd add that my goal in all this is to  find clarity, I do not have an opinion as to the fate of anyone let alone people who lived 1400 years ago. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is the best and only judge. What I hope we can do is find a way to agree how we can reconcile our theological differences and bringing more people closer to AhlAlbayt (عليه السلام).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
22 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

t should be me who should ask first that in which shia book you found that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) paid allegiance to Hazrat Abu Bakar.

 

I didn't find it in a Shia book, my goal was to use majority Sunni sources and Quran. I don't have to convince Shia that AbuBakr had no legitimate Quranic/religious authority over the Calipha, I think we are all in agreement on that. After your comment I have started to look further into the subject of who gave bay'a to whom. Any reference would be appreciated - particularly as they pertain to Imam Hassan(عليه السلام) and his agreement with MooAWeewho(la).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, Cool said:

The case of Syeda Fatima s.a agains Abu Bakr was such a case that separate falsehood with truth.

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has commanded to follow the path of some people in Al-Fatiha:

صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ

(The path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors)

If this ayat remained at this point people may not know the truth. So the verse moves ahead to further describe the traits of those upon whom Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has bestowed favors:

غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ 

Not (the path) of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray.

Syeda Fatima's s.a case not only proves Abu Bakr as مغضوب but also proved him from among الضَّالِّينَ.

The reason why he is maghdoob can be understood from the following sahih narration:

فاطِمَةُ بَضْعَةٌ مِنِّي، فمَن أغْضَبَها أغْضَبَنِي.

الراوي : المسور بن مخرمة | المحدث : البخاري | المصدر : صحيح البخاري | الصفحة أو الرقم : 3767 | خلاصة حكم المحدث : [صحيح] | التخريج : أخرجه البخاري (3714)، ومسلم (2449)

And the one who angered Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has infact angered Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). The one who cause distress to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) is cursed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى):

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا مُّهِينًا

33:57

Although these two also sufficient for establishing him as الضَّالِّينَ but I am giving here another reason. 

Syeda Fatima s.a is from the certified sadiqeen as she is the one who went with Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in mubahila and the divine command for all the believers is this:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَكُونُوا مَعَ الصَّادِقِينَ {119}

[Shakir 9:119] O you who believe! be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones.

So Abu Bakr appeared as liar and a person who gone astray. So Abu Bakr's & Umar's way must not to be followed. Now you can get the idea why Imam Ali (عليه السلام) refused the clause presented to him at the time of election of 3rd caliph:

هل أنت مبايعي على كتاب الله وسنة نبيه (ص) وفعل أبي بكر وعمر ؟

Kitab Allah & Sunnah of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are apparently seems two but are actually one thing. The clear refusal of the 3rd clause by Imam Ali (عليه السلام) is sufficient to further strengthen that the way (sirat) and actions of these must not be followed. 

This is the Jihad of Syeda Fatima s.a, and She clearly defeated these two.

Excuse my ignorance, how do we reconcile the actions of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) - he fought against MooAweWho(la) with Imam Hassan(عليه السلام) who had an agreement with him to Imam Hussein(عليه السلام) who sacrificed himself against YeeZooD(la)?

Salam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
21 minutes ago, Mohamad_ali said:

Any reference would be appreciated - particularly as they pertain to Imam Hassan(عليه السلام) and his agreement with MooAWeewho(la).

There is one convincing reference that of Karbala brother wherein Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) said: "A man like me can never pay allegiance to a man like Yazeed". Thus, none of Imams of Ahlebait (عليه السلام) did bayah to oppressive rulers. 

Even in Imam Hasan's case allegiance was not the condition of agreement with Muawiyah. 

As regards people who didn't pay allegiance to Hazrat Abu Bakar, read the following page:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sahabah_who_did_not_give_bay'ah_to_Abu_Bakr#:~:text=However%2C it is reported that,request of Muhammad's daughter Fatimah.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Mohamad_ali said:

I don't consider him legitimate at all. I believe I have shown, using methods & text agreed by our Sunni Brothers and Sisters, that even by their own logic he was wrong in assuming power ahead of Ali(عليه السلام). I don't need to prove to the Shia his appointment is inconsistent with the Quran and Sunna because we already believe that. Once we agree the appointment was inconsistent with the Quran and Sunna we don't need to discus the process because the process becomes illegitimate..

We are in agreement that the Abu bakr was illegitimate successor of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and so on afterwards the other two caliphs being illegitimate. Thus the stance of Fatima saa is correct and we consider her a reference standard of truth.

I also like to add that  virtues of the Ahl albayt as is also exhibited by the verse of Mubahila 3:61. 

فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَى الْكَاذِبِينَ

But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars. (3:61)

Thus Ahl albayt (عليه السلام), are the standard reference of truth. For us whoever came against the prophet, Imam Ali, Fatima Zahra, Imam Hasan and Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) they were liars.

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 8/19/2022 at 8:27 AM, Mohamad_ali said:

Now after her death, Ali(عليه السلام) gave Bay'a to Abu Bakr.

Did that legitimize Abu Bakr's position?

 

On 8/19/2022 at 8:27 AM, Mohamad_ali said:

Ali(عليه السلام) Bay'a was acceptance of Abu Bakr as Calipha (political leader) not his Imama.

 

On 8/19/2022 at 9:10 PM, Borntowitnesstruth said:

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) never gave allegiance to Abu Bakar.

 

On 8/20/2022 at 12:06 AM, Mohamad_ali said:

Can you explain further, do we have any other ref?

 

On 8/20/2022 at 4:45 PM, Muslim2010 said:

Imam Ali did not give a baya to the people chosen caliphs.

The following is an extract of a hadeeth found in Bihar al-Anwar.

image.png.17992cb62768784f8a7eeae730bcda9a.png

He [the narrator] said:

"They brought him [Imam Ali (عليه السلام)] out from his house tied up, and they went with him to the grave of the Prophet (s), and I heard him saying: "'Son of my mother, indeed this people thought me to be weak, and they were about to kill me' [7:150]"

image.png.bebe79d8bee40c37aaf0287b81bf1b64.png

And Abu Bakr sat in the shed of the clan of Saaeda and brought Ali (a) forward.

Omar said to him, "Pledge allegiance!"

Ali (a) said to him, "What if I don't?"

Omar said to him, "Then, by Allah, I will strike off you neck."

image.png.e17debf9b4d4387b2f5cdc63bae21c25.png

Ali said to him, "Then, by Allah , I would become a murdered servant of Allah and brother of Rasulullah (s)."

Omar said, "As for you being a killed servant of Allah, so yes, but as for being a brother of Rasulullah (s), so no" – until he said it thrice.

image.png.0c8120495f9303438372f3b89c1cef7a.png

That reached al-Abbas Ibn Abdul Mottaleb, and he came sprinting hurriedly, and I heard him saying,

"Be gentle O son of my brother, and for you all it is upon me that he pledges allegiance to you."

Al-Abbas came and grabbed the hand of Ali (a) and wiped it upon the hand of Abu Bakr."

(Source: Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 28 -> The book of fitna and ordeals, Ch. 4, H. 14)

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was compelled to pledge allegiance. And he still didn't even pledge; rather it was just Abbas Ibn Abul Mottaleb who took the hand of Ameer al-Momineen (عليه السلام) and put it on the hand of Abu Bakr. So it wasn't really an allegiance, but it was enough for Abu Bakr to be satisfied.

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, -Rejector- said:

 

 

 

 

The following is an extract of a hadeeth found in Bihar al-Anwar.

image.png.17992cb62768784f8a7eeae730bcda9a.png

He [the narrator] said:

"They brought him [Imam Ali (عليه السلام)] out from his house tied up, and they went with him to the grave of the Prophet (s), and I heard him saying: "'Son of my mother, indeed this people thought me to be weak, and they were about to kill me' [7:150]"

image.png.bebe79d8bee40c37aaf0287b81bf1b64.png

And Abu Bakr sat in the shed of the clan of Saaeda and brought Ali (a) forward.

Omar said to him, "Pledge allegiance!"

Ali (a) said to him, "What if I don't?"

Omar said to him, "Then, by Allah, I will strike off you neck."

image.png.e17debf9b4d4387b2f5cdc63bae21c25.png

Ali said to him, "Then, by Allah , I would become a murdered servant of Allah and brother of Rasulullah (s)."

Omar said, "As for you being a killed servant of Allah, so yes, but as for being a brother of Rasulullah (s), so no" – until he said it thrice.

image.png.0c8120495f9303438372f3b89c1cef7a.png

That reached al-Abbas Ibn Abdul Mottaleb, and he came sprinting hurriedly, and I heard him saying,

"Be gentle O son of my brother, and for you all it is upon me that he pledges allegiance to you."

Al-Abbas came and grabbed the hand of Ali (a) and wiped it upon the hand of Abu Bakr."

(Source: Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 28 -> The book of fitna and ordeals, Ch. 4, H. 14)

Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was compelled to pledge allegiance. And he still didn't even pledge; rather it was just Abbas Ibn Abul Mottaleb who took the hand of Ameer al-Momineen (عليه السلام) and put it on the hand of Abu Bakr. So it wasn't really an allegiance, but it was enough for Abu Bakr to be satisfied.

image.png

This Hadith is against the other known facts such as if Imam Ali's hand was wiped over Hazrat Abu Bakr's hand which he and people took as allegiance then why didn't people questioned Imam Ali (عليه السلام) during the third Shura where Imam Ali (عليه السلام) refused to follow Sunnah of Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umer why the people didn't ask him that in the life of Abu Bakr you pledged allegiance to him then why are you backing off from following his Sunnah. We don't see any such question there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

The purpose of this brief is to have my brothers and sisters in islam review, add, clarify and question my logic in the case I bring forward against Abu Bakr as the first Caliph. I do not wish to denigrate the man, only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows his heart and his intentions. All we have is the events agreed upon by the most prominent Islamic scholars from across the spectrum of sects, Theologies and historical writings.

Assalama alaykum Brother

I had imposed self-exile from Shiachat upon myself but your post dragged me back to set the score straight. You asked/raised a lot of questions and I am attempting to answer all of them. I humbly disagree with the highlighted part of your statement. If most prominent Islamic scholars from the spectrum of sects, theologies and historical writings are in agreement then there should have no problems. Right?

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

The premise is simple, in order for Abu Bakr to be rightly guided, his term as Caliph must have been accepted by Fatima (عليه السلام) according to Sunni Accepted Hadith and Quran. I plan to show that ... 

Your premise may be simple to you as you claim but apparently your ‘knowledge’ of Sunni Islam is very shaky and narrowly limited to what is dished out to you from Shia biased sources.

Almost all of questions raised by you are connected with historical events. Bear in mind history has many versions. There is real history of real events. The opinions are given by each side of what they think happened putting on their own spin. Each side can interpret the facts to suit their narratives.

History is written by the winners, goes the old saying. But that’s not entirely true. The losers also write their version of what happened, with a different spin. And to self-console themselves they tend exaggerate their history.

I suggest you read ‘Any Version of History is just a (hi)STORY’ written by Saeed Mubarak

I would have preferred it to be (his)STORY.  Each one has his own story.

Having said the above, I’ll attempt to answer your points raised in detail and believe me there are a lot of questions raised. Please read with open mind putting your personal bias aside for a while.

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Within the accepted Sunna Books it is agreed that whoever dies without being bound by allegiance to the Imam of their time dies an apostate or Jahiliyya.

The word ‘apostate’ is not uttered by the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). 

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: One who defected from obedience (to the Amir) and separated from the main body of the Muslims - if he died in that state-would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyya (i.e. would not die as a Muslim)...

Sahih Muslim 1848a

Narrated Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman:

The people used to ask Allah's Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) about the good but I used to ask him about the evil lest I should be overtaken by them. So, I said, "O Allah's Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him)! We were living in ignorance and in an (extremely) worst atmosphere, then Allah brought to us this good (i.e., Islam); will there be any evil after this good?" He said, "Yes." I said, 'Will there be any good after that evil?" He replied, "Yes, but it will be tainted (not pure.)'' I asked, "What will be its taint?" He replied, "(There will be) some people who will guide others not according to my tradition? You will approve of some of their deeds and disapprove of some others." I asked, "Will there be any evil after that good?" He replied, "Yes, (there will be) some people calling at the gates of the (Hell) Fire, and whoever will respond to their call, will be thrown by them into the (Hell) Fire." I said, "O Allah s Apostle! Will you describe them to us?" He said, "They will be from our own people and will speak our language." I said, "What do you order me to do if such a state should take place in my life?" He said, "Stick to the group of Muslims and their Imam (ruler)." I said, "If there is neither a group of Muslims nor an Imam (ruler)?" He said, "Then turn away from all those sects even if you were to bite (eat) the roots of a tree till death overtakes you while you are in that state." Sahih al-Bukhari 7084

Note:

The above narration clearly shows that there could be a time when there will be no Imam (as this is happening in this era). This completely destroys the Shia belief that earth can’t survive without an Imam. Notice that He (peace and blessings be upon him) wasn’t surprised when the questioner (Hudhayfah) asked what should be done when there is no Imam. He (peace and blessings be upon him) didn’t reject the question of people saying how could earth survive with without an Imam. This is sufficient to understand the falsification of the belief in Hidden Imam!!!

Also, Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) said the same thing.

Read the last paragraph of Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha!!!! So, you disagree with him?

Let me you to refer to Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha (A letter sent by Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin.) – Where Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) has unambiguously addressed Hz. Abu Bakr, Hz. Umar bin Al Khattab and Hz. Uthman bin Affan (may Allah Be pleased with them) as IMAMS!!!!

“Verily, those who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman have sworn allegiance to me on the same basis on which they swore allegiance to them. (On this basis) he who was present has no choice (to consider), and he who was absent has no right to reject; and consultation is confined to the muhajirun and the ansar. If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.

If anyone keeps away by way of objection or innovation, they will return him to the position from where he kept away. If he refuses, they will fight him for following a course other than that of the believers and Allah will put him back from where he had run away.”  Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha

He clearly states that anyone who keeps away by way of objection or innovation and if refuses then fight them till, they return to the course of the Believers! And Allah will put him back from where he had run away.

Keep the following utterance in mind - and if refuses then fight them till, they return to the course of the Believers! Guess what would happen to those refuse to return.

That’s what he did with Khajirites in the Battle of Naharwan. Read all about it in the following link.

Khajirites were around 4000 soldiers and only lesson that 10 of them managed to escape. One of whom was 'Abd al-Rahman b. Muljam al-Muradi (the cursed) who later martyred Imam Ali (may Allah be pleased with him)

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Battle_of_Nahrawan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Each person on day of judgement will be judged under the flag of the imam they gave their allegiance to.
 

  • Quran 17:71 يَوْمَ نَدْعُوا۟ كُلَّ أُنَاسٍۭ بِإِمَـٰمِهِمْ ۖ فَمَنْ أُوتِىَ كِتَـٰبَهُۥ بِيَمِينِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ يَقْرَءُونَ كِتَـٰبَهُمْ وَلَا يُظْلَمُونَ فَتِيلًا - The Day will surely come when We shall summon every people with their leader (Imami'him). Then those who are given their records in their right hands will read their records [eagerly] and shall not in the least be wronged:

 

I said, "If there is neither a group of Muslims nor an Imam (ruler)?" He said, "Then turn away from all those sects even if you were to bite (eat) the roots of a tree till death overtakes you while you are in that state." Sahih al-Bukhari 7084 - Read the full hadith https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7084

So, in this situation with no Khilafah/Imam, the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) has advised that believers should shun sectarian issues and strifes and stick to Quran and Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and endeavour to lead simplest lives. Islamic Ummah has passed this situation before in 1258 Abbasid caliphate was destroyed by the Mongol invasion

In 1261, following the Mongol conquest of Baghdad, the Mamluk rulers of Egypt tried to gain legitimacy for their rule by declaring the re-establishment of the Abbasid caliphate in Cairo. The Abbasid caliphs in Egypt had little political power; they continued to maintain the symbols of authority, but their sway was confined to religious matters. The first Abbasid caliph of Cairo was Al-Mustansir (r. June–November 1261). The Abbasid caliphate of Cairo lasted until the time of Al-Mutawakkil III, who ruled as caliph from 1508 to 1516, then he was deposed briefly in 1516 by his predecessor Al-Mustamsik, but was restored again to the caliphate in 1517.

Great Sultan Selim I defeated the Mamluk Sultanate and made Egypt part of the Ottoman Empire in 1517. Al-Mutawakkil III was captured together with his family and transported to Constantinople as a prisoner where he had a ceremonial role. He died in 1543, following his return to Cairo. From then on, the Khilafat passed on to Uthmaniyah Sultan. In 1924 the Zionists conspired with the then dominant European powers and their local ‘Muslim’ cahoots and destroyed and dismembered it into petty small disjointed states.

As according the hadith there will be times of Fitnah and fasad (trials and tribulations) when there will be NO Universal Islamic leadership.  In these times believers have been advised by the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to avoid controversies and tread the narrow path of following the Qur’an and live our lives following the Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

Khalifah is not a pillar of Sunni doctrine.  But there must be an elected leader among Sunni Muslim community/country that to defend the doctrine of religion.  There will be times when Khilafah wouldn’t exist -as it is nowadays and has been before.

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

After the death of The Prophet ﷺ there was disagreement over who would assume the leadership of the Umma as both Political and Religious leader (Caliph & Imam)

This disagreement was overcome as per instructions of the Blessed Qur’an.

who respond to their Lord, establish prayer, conduct their affairs by mutual consultation, and donate from what We have provided for them Ayah 38 Surah ash-Shura (appropriately named Consultation)

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Anyone who did not give allegiance/Bay'a to the Caliph/Imam was therefore considered an apostate, and the penalty was Death.

This is completely wrong and false!!! You are just making things up.

According to historical facts about six to seven Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not initially give bayah to Hz. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him).

Were they declared apostates and killed?  Please don’t make things up as you go along.

Those who challenged the nascent Islamic state and were preparing to attack it were taken to task and that fitnah was brought to an end.

You will be surprised that Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) agrees to the above!!!

Read the last paragraph of Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha!!!! So, do you disagree with him?

Let me you to refer to Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha (A letter sent by Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin.) – Where Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) has unambiguously addressed Hz. Abu Bakr, Hz. Umar bin Al Khattab and Hz. Uthman bin Affan (may Allah Be pleased with them) as IMAMS!!!!

“Verily, those who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman have sworn allegiance to me on the same basis on which they swore allegiance to them. (On this basis) he who was present has no choice (to consider), and he who was absent has no right to reject; and consultation is confined to the muhajirun and the ansar. If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.

If anyone keeps away by way of objection or innovation, they will return him to the position from where he kept away. If he refuses, they will fight him for following a course other than that of the believers and Allah will put him back from where he had run away.”  Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha

He clearly states that anyone who keeps away by way of objection or innovation and if refuses then fight them till, they return to the course of the Believers! And Allah will put him back from where he had run away. What would happen to those who did not return to course of Believers?

Also note:

Battle of Nahrawan – see what Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) did the Khawarij who once his diehard supporters!!!!!

Battle of Nahrawān (Arabic: معركة النهروان) was among the battles during the caliphate of Imam Ali (a) which happened after the Battle of Siffin and following the event of Hakamiyya [arbitration] in Safar of 38/658. On one side of the battle was a group of people known as Mariqun or Khawarij. In this battle, Khawarij were defeated by the army of Imam Ali (a). It is said that less than ten soldiers from Khawarij could run away unharmed. Among them, 'Abd al-Rahman b. Muljam al-Muradi, the murderer of Imam Ali (a).

You must be knowing that before the beginning of hostilities the Khawarij were 4000 strong. Only less than 10 soldiers managed to escape!!!!!!!! So, more than 3990, who one-time allies just a few months ago, were killed!!

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Battle_of_Nahrawan

So, the Ridda Wars ('Apostasy Wars) were not conducted to gain personal power as you (shias) intend to imply, rather were to get rid of Apostasy of tribal leaders, get rid of false prophets and those who refused to pat Zakat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ridda_Wars    link about Ridda Wars

Now refer to Arabic version Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha – the actual words uttered by Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him).

إِنَّهُ بَايَعَنِي الْقَوْمُ الَّذِينَ بَايَعُوا أَبَا بَكْر وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمانَ عَلَى مَا بَايَعُوهُمْ عَلَيْهِ، فَلَمْ يَكُنْ لِلشَّاهِدِ أَنْ يَخْتَارَ، وَلاَ لِلغَائِبِ أَنْ يَرُدَّ، وَإنَّمَا الشُّورَى لِلْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالاْنْصَارِ، فَإِنِ اجْتَمَعُوا عَلَى رَجُل وَسَمَّوْهُ إِمَاماً كَانَ ذلِكَ لله رِضىً، فَإِنْ خَرَجَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِمْ خَارِجٌ بِطَعْن أَوْبِدْعَة رَدُّوهُ إِلَى مَاخَرَجَ منه، فَإِنْ أَبَى قَاتَلُوهُ عَلَى اتِّبَاعِهِ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَوَلاَّهُ اللهُ مَا تَوَلَّى.

“If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.”

He used the word IMAM – Well knowing all the meanings and implications of this word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

So if after the Prophet ﷺ the Imam/Religious Authority over all Muslims is Abu Bakr, then all who did not give allegiance to Abu Bakr are considered Jahiliyya / apostate. (this was the reason for the Ridda/Apostate Wars)

How wrong you are!!! You got to refresh your history from authentic resources and not rely on what is dished out by zakirs.

After passing away of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) various individual charlatans, each backed by their tribal members declared prophethood for themselves challenging the finality of the Prophet hood! Other tribal leaders declared that their pact with Muhammad was of personal nature and that they felt no obligation to serve the new leader; they refused to submit their collection of the zakat.
This had nothing to do with Imamate issue.

Read the following:

1) Tulayha ibn Khuwaylid ibn Nawfal al-Asadi – He undertook the first attack on the caliphate, in an attempt to capture Medina, the capital of the caliphate.

Hz. Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) took part in battle to defeat Tulayha’s army.

In July 632, Abu Bakr raised an army mainly from Banu Hashim, a clan within the tribe of Quraysh. Ali ibn Abi Talib, Talha ibn Ubaidullah and Zubair ibn al-Awam (may Allah be pleased with them), were each appointed as commander of one-third of the newly organized force. They fought the Battle of Zhu Qissa against the forces of Tulayha and his followers as they prepared to launch an attack on Medina during the Ridda wars. The Rashidun commanders held until they were reinforced by Abu Bakr. Tulayha was defeated and his forces were driven back to Zhu Hussa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulayha

2) Musaylima al-Kadhdhāb who had declared himself prophet during the life of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). When the news of passing away the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) reached Musaylima he raised an army of 40,000 soldiers. Hz. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) sent an army under the command of Hz. ʿIkrima ibn Abī Jahl (may Allah be pleased with him)

Musaylimah (d. Dec 632 CE), "the Arch Liar" as he is referred to by the Muslims. Abu Bakr, being a close friend and a loyal companion of Muhammad, could not allow his Prophet's faith to be twisted into different versions, and so his decision to primarily employ military action to crush this rebellion may also have had sentimental reasons entwined with practical ones.

https://www.worldhistory.org/Ridda_Wars/

Sajah bint Al-Harith ibn Suayd Sajah was one of a series of people (including her future husband) who claimed prophethood in 7th-century Arabia and was also the only female claiming to be a prophetess during the Wars of Apostasy in Early Islamic Period. Her father, Al-Harith, belonged to the Banu Taghlib tribe of Iraq.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sajah

Al-Aswad al-Ansi Aswad al-Ansi (Arabic: الاسود العنسي; died 632[1]), also known as Abhala bin Ka'b (Arabic: عبهلة بن كعب), was the leader of the Banu Ans tribe and a self-proclaimed prophet, one of the four major false prophets of the Wars of Apostasy. He lived in Yemen and proclaimed his prophethood towards the end of the Muhammad's lifetime. He was also known as "the Veiled," or Dhu al-Khimar (Arabic: ذي الخمار),[2] as he used to cover his face to create an aura of mystery.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Aswad_al-Ansi

Saf ibn Sayyad (Arabic: الصف بن الصياد), later known as Abdullah ibn Sa'id (Arabic: عبد الله بن سعيد), was an alleged claimant of prophethood during the time of Islamic prophet Muhammad and his companions who later disappeared after the Ridda wars. Umar bin Khattab and even some scholars today speculate that he might be the Ad-Dajjal who would later come in this world as the False Messiah.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saf_ibn_Sayyad

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

The Prophet said 

Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

Sahih al-Bukhari 3714

 

Here you have unwittingly scored a huge own goal!!!!!

Indeed, the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) uttered those words. These were not uttered against Hz. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) and these were not uttered in connection with issue of Fadak. 

With respect, I’ll refrain from letting you why and for whom the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) uttered these words!  Imam Jaffar as Sadiq (may Allah be pleased with him) has also related the same in Shia sources! If you still don’t get it, ask your fellow Shias as for whom these words were uttered. I am sure they all know it. Otherwise let me know. I’ll send the information to you by private message.  Be prepared for a very unpleasant shock!!

As I told you that have unwittingly scored a huge own goal!!!!! And shot yourself in the foot at the same time!!!! What a remarkable feat!!!!

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

`A'isha reported ... she Fatima (عليه السلام) said that he (the Holy Prophet) told her ... Aren't you pleased that you should be the sovereign amongst the believing women or the head of women of this Ummah? And this made me laugh. Sahih Muslim 2450c

Nice of you to quote something good from Hz. ‘Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her)!!!! And trust her!!!! Quite heartening.

Allow me to give you the link to the above hadith so that you can read the full hadith.  https://sunnah.com/muslim:2450c

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

When Fatima(عليه السلام) died she died unhappy with Abu Bakr 

So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not talk to him till she died. Sahih al-Bukhari 4240

You quoted just one sentence from the above hadith (Sahih al-Bukhari 4240) just to make your point. I’m giving the link to the above hadith – its long but read it.

https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4240

So `Ali sought reconciliation with Abu Bakr and gave him an oath of allegiance. `Ali had not given the oath of allegiance during those months (i.e. the period between the Prophet's death and Fatima's death). `Ali sent someone to Abu Bakr saying, "Come to us, but let nobody come with you," as he disliked that `Umar should come, `Umar said (to Abu Bakr), "No, by Allah, you shall not enter upon them alone " Abu Bakr said, "What do you think they will do to me? By Allah, I will go to them' So Abu Bakr entered upon them, and then `Ali uttered Tashah-hud and said (to Abu Bakr), "We know well your superiority and what Allah has given you, and we are not jealous of the good what Allah has bestowed upon you, but you did not consult us in the question of the rule and we thought that we have got a right in it because of our near relationship to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ." Thereupon Abu Bakr's eyes flowed with tears. And when Abu Bakr spoke, he said, "By Him in Whose Hand my soul is to keep good relations with the relatives of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is dearer to me than to keep good relations with my own relatives. But as for the trouble which arose between me and you about his property, I will do my best to spend it according to what is good, and will not leave any rule or regulation which I saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) following, in disposing of it, but I will follow." On that `Ali said to Abu Bakr, "I promise to give you the oath of allegiance in this after noon." So, when Abu Bakr had offered the Zuhr prayer, he ascended the pulpit and uttered the Tashah-hud and then mentioned the story of `Ali and his failure to give the oath of allegiance, and excused him, accepting what excuses he had offered; Then `Ali (got up) and praying (to Allah) for forgiveness, he uttered Tashah-hud, praised Abu Bakr's right, and said, that he had not done what he had done because of jealousy of Abu Bakr or as a protest of that Allah had favoured him with. `Ali added, "But we used to consider that we too had some right in this affair (of rulership) and that he (i.e. Abu Bakr) did not consult us in this matter, and therefore caused us to feel sorry." On that all the Muslims became happy and said, "You have done the right thing." The Muslims then became friendly with `Ali as he returned to what the people had done (i.e. giving the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr). - Sahih al-Bukhari 4240 & Sahih Muslim 1759a

Note: If Hz. Ali iibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was divinely appointed as an Imam, he was duty bound to mention this there and then. He never reminded anyone about Ghadir Khumm.

Recall when the leaders of Quraish forced to Abu Talib, trying to get him to stop or tone down the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) preaching the message against their gods, the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) replied:  

“O my uncle! Know that even if they give the sun to my right hand and the moon to my left hand (that is, whatever they promise) I will never abandon this Message nor stop communicating it to people. Either Allah Almighty spreads this Message over the world and my duty is completed, or I will sacrifice my life on this path.” He stood up. His blessed eyes were full of tears.

Abu Talib, who saw that the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was extremely upset, regretted what he said and told him, “O my brother’s son! Proceed on your way, do what you want. I will protect you, as long as I am alive.”

Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) from among most upright men. He was well known for his unchallenged bravery and sagacity. If he was divinely appointed as an Imam, he would stated this then and there. Fearing no one any consequences.

Shia source: Shia records also confirm that Hz. Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) became pleased with Hadrat Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with her).

Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani writes in the context of interpreting Nahj-ul-Balaga: “Abu Bakr said to Fatima: Whatever belonged to your father, belongs to you as well. The Messenger of Allah kept something apart out of his personal share (fadak) and distributed the rest of it in the name of Allah. By Allah, I’ll do with you what he used to do with you. Fatima was pleased to hear these words, a confirmation of the Prophetic practice” Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani, Sharh Nahj-ul-Balaga, Vol.5, P. 107,109, Tehran

Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Ibn_Maytham_al-Bahrani

Sunni source:

“When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, ‘O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.’ She answered, ‘Do you want me to give him permission?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ So, she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: ‘By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.’ So, he talked to her until she was pleased with him.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi, vol 6, page 301)

I don’t think Hz. Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) was ever angry with Hz. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) regarding property of Fadak as it was well known that she was above the worldly greed and was always content with her life and for this had received glad tidings of Paradise from her very dear father, the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). They both lived very simple and austere/puritanical lives by CHOICE.

Narrated `Ali: Fatima complained of what she suffered from the hand mill and from grinding, when she got the news that some slave girls of the booty had been brought to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). She went to him to ask for a maid-servant, but she could not find him, and told `Aisha of her need. When the Prophet (ﷺ) came, Aisha informed him of that. The Prophet (ﷺ) came to our house when we had gone to our beds. (On seeing the Prophet) we were going to get up, but he said, 'Keep at your places,' I felt the coolness of the Prophet's feet on my chest. Then he said, "Shall I tell you a thing which is better than what you asked me for? When you go to your beds, say: 'Allahu Akbar (i.e. Allah is Greater)' for 34 times, and 'Al hamdu Li llah (i.e. all the praises are for Allah)' for 33 times, and Subhan Allah (i.e. Glorified be Allah) for 33 times. This is better for you than what you have requested." Sahih al-Bukhari 3113 Sahih Muslim 2727a

It brings tears to one’s eyes that the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in his supreme wisdom didn’t grant this simplest of request to ease her life. Keeping in that he loved her immensely and she was later promised highest position heaven. Instead recommended her to praise and glorify Allah Almighty. This has become famous and known as Tasbeeh Fatimah. With such noble upbringing do you really think she was concerned about Fadak properties and other worldly luxuries?

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Fatima(عليه السلام) also refused to give Bay'a/Allegiance to Abu Bakr.

Women were/are not required to give bayah. Anyway, can you give authentic reference to your statement. That you heard it from a scholar/Zakir will not do..

 

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:
  • If the Hadith and ruling above are taken as accurate, then Fatima(عليه السلام) according to Sunni hadith died a Jahilliyya/apostate because she did not have an imam.
  • That is not possible because we either have to accept that the Prophet ﷺ was wrong in saying that Fatima (عليه السلام) would be in heaven, or she did give allegiance/Bay'a to her Imam. 

Faulty arguments and conclusions.

If you implying that she gave bayah to Hz. Ali (may Allah pleased with them) and he went ahead and gave bayah to Hz. Abu Bakr Hz. Ali (may Allah pleased with him). confirmed in Shia Sunni hadith. Strange, isn’t it?

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

The Prophet ﷺ can not be wrong, and we all agree on that (i hope) so Fatima(عليه السلام) must be in heaven.

 

Of course, the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) cannot ever be wrong!!!! Why have you put ‘I hope’ in brackets. You are inadvertently implying some doubt about this!

`A'isha reported ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, And when he (the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)) died I again asked her and she said that he (the Holy Prophet) told her: Gabriel used to recite the Qur'an to me once a year and for this year it was twice and so I perceived that my death had drawn near, and that I (Fatima) would be the first amongst the members of his family who would meet him (in the Hereafter). He shall be my good forerunner and it made me weep. He again talked to me secretly (saying): Aren't you pleased that you should be the sovereign amongst the believing women or the head of women of this Ummah? And this made me laugh. Sahih Muslim 2450cthe

The Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) has given her the good news of high status and rank in the Highest Heaven!!!!

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:
  • Fatima did not give Allegiance/Bay'a to Abu Bakr, so which Imam did she give her allegiance to?
  • The only Imam she could have given allegiance to is the rightful successor to the Prophet ﷺ.

Women were/are not required to give bayah. Anyway, can you give authentic reference to your statement. Not that you heard it from in a talk/lecture.

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:
  • That could not be Abu Bakr because she not only died unhappy with him, she also refused to give Bay'a
  • The only person she would give her Bay'a to and was making the argument for as the leader after her father ﷺ was Ali(عليه السلام).

Please provide an authentic and unambiguous hadith for the above statements.

Further down this post I have provided you with hadith from Sunni and Shia sources that Hz. Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) she was happy and pleased with Hz. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

So he must be the Rightfully appointed imam

Let me you to refer to Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha (A letter sent by Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin.) – Where Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) has unambiguously addressed Hz. Abu Bakr, Hz. Umar bin Al Khattab and Hz. Uthman bin Affan (may Allah Be pleased with them) as IMAMS!!!!

“Verily, those who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman have sworn allegiance to me on the same basis on which they swore allegiance to them. (On this basis) he who was present has no choice (to consider), and he who was absent has no right to reject; and consultation is confined to the muhajirun and the ansar. If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.

Hz. Ali (may Allah be pleased with him)- has already pointed out rightful Imam with Allah Almighty's pleasure.

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Now after her death, Ali(عليه السلام) gave Bay'a to Abu Bakr.

Glad that you have conceded that he gave the Bayah! May I ask you why he had to wait for this?

Hadith from Shia source – From Imam Muhammad Baqir (may Allah be pleased with him)

al-Tabrisi narrates from (Imam) Muhammad Baqir that when Usamah had left for Jihad when the Messenger of Allah passed away, the news reached Usamah (and) he returned with his army to Medinah. He (Usamah) saw a great number of people surrounding Abu Bakr; on seeing this, he went to question Ali ibn Abi Talib and asked: “What is this?” Ali ibn Abi Talib replied: “It is exactly what you are seeing!” Usamah asked: “Have you (also) given Baya’ah to him?” Ali ibn Abi Talib replied: “Yes.” (Al-Ihtejaj, Allama   Abu Mansur, Ahmad al-Tabrisi p.50: Printed Mashhad, Iran)

Sunni source:

It has been narrated on the authority of 'A'isha that Fatima and 'Abbas approached Abu Bakr, soliciting transfer of the legacy of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) to them. At that time, they were demanding his (Holy Prophet's) lands at Fadak and his share from Khaibar. Abu Bakr said to them:

I have heard from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). Then he quoted the hadith having nearly the same meaning as the one which has been narrated by Uqail on the authority of al-Zuhri (and which his gone before) except that in his version he said: Then 'Ali stood up, extolled the merits of Abu Bakr mentioned his superiority, and his earlier acceptance of Islam. Then he walked to Abu Bakr and swore allegiance to him. (At this) people turned towards 'Ali and said: you have done the right thing. And they became favourably inclined to 'Ali after he had adopted the proper course of action.  Sahih Muslim 1759b

This is very long hadith so I am posting the relevant material.

……………. So Abu Bakr entered upon them, and then `Ali uttered Tashah-hud and said (to Abu Bakr), "We know well your superiority and what Allah has given you, and we are not jealous of the good what Allah has bestowed upon you, but you did not consult us in the question of the rule and we thought that we have got a right in it because of our near relationship to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ." Thereupon Abu Bakr's eyes flowed with tears. And when Abu Bakr spoke, he said, "By Him in Whose Hand my soul is to keep good relations with the relatives of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is dearer to me than to keep good relations with my own relatives. But as for the trouble which arose between me and you about his property, I will do my best to spend it according to what is good, and will not leave any rule or regulation which I saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) following, in disposing of it, but I will follow." On that `Ali said to Abu Bakr, "I promise to give you the oath of allegiance in this after noon." So, when Abu Bakr had offered the Zuhr prayer, he ascended the pulpit and uttered the Tashah-hud and then mentioned the story of `Ali and his failure to give the oath of allegiance, and excused him, accepting what excuses he had offered; Then `Ali (got up) and praying (to Allah) for forgiveness, he uttered Tashah-hud, praised Abu Bakr's right, and said, that he had not done what he had done because of jealousy of Abu Bakr or as a protest of that Allah had favoured him with. `Ali added, "But we used to consider that we too had some right in this affair (of rulership) and that he (i.e., Abu Bakr) did not consult us in this matter, and therefore caused us to feel sorry." On that all the Muslims became happy and said, "You have done the right thing." The Muslims then became friendly with `Ali as he returned to what the people had done (i.e., giving the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr). Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari 4240, 4241

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Did that legitimize Abu Bakr's position?

Of course! Don’t you consider Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) infallible Imam?

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

The argument was always that Ali(عليه السلام) was appointed by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), so only Allah could take that away.

This argument holds no water. (Full of huge glaring holes!!!!) Your claim is that Allah Almighty appointed Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) as a successor to the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and rightly so that ONLY Allah Almighty has the right to take away! Read the following sermon and answer the questions put forward to you in true honesty.

Now refer to Sermon 92 of Nahjul Balagha

When people decided to swear allegiance at Amir al-mu'minin's hand after the murder of ‘Uthman, he said:
“Leave me and seek someone else. We are facing a matter which has (several) faces and colours, which neither hearts can stand nor intelligence can accept. Clouds are hovering over the sky, and faces are not discernible. You should know that if I respond to you, I would lead you as I know and would not listen to the utterance of any speaker or the reproof of any reprover. If you leave me then I am the same as you are. It is possible I would listen to and obey whomever you make in charge of your affairs. I am better for you as a counsellor than as chief.
Sermon 92 Nahjul Balagha

Now care to answer the following:

1) Can somebody who is appointed to a position by Allah Almighty has the right to say to people: 

“Leave me and seek someone else”?

Did he have the permission to delegate his Divine appointment to anyone people suggested?

Would he Say, it is possible I would listen to and obey whomever you make in charge of your affairs?

Would he Say, I am better for you as a counsellor than as chief?

Would a person who is Divinely appointed to Imamate on his own initiative wash his hands off from this responsibility?

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Ali(عليه السلام) Bay'a was acceptance of Abu Bakr as Calipha (political leader) not his Imama.

How wrong you are!! Hz. Ali ibn Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) has claimed his predecessors as Imams!!!!!!

Let me you to refer to Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha (A letter sent by Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin.) – Where Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) has unambiguously addressed Hz. Abu Bakr, Hz. Umar bin Al Khattab and Hz. Uthman bin Affan (may Allah Be pleased with them) as IMAMS!!!!

“Verily, those who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman have sworn allegiance to me on the same basis on which they swore allegiance to them. (On this basis) he who was present has no choice (to consider), and he who was absent has no right to reject; and consultation is confined to the muhajirun and the ansar. If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.

If anyone keeps away by way of objection or innovation, they will return him to the position from where he kept away. If he refuses, they will fight him for following a course other than that of the believers and Allah will put him back from where he had run away.”  Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha

إِنَّهُ بَايَعَنِي الْقَوْمُ الَّذِينَ بَايَعُوا أَبَا بَكْر وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمانَ عَلَى مَا بَايَعُوهُمْ عَلَيْهِ، فَلَمْ يَكُنْ لِلشَّاهِدِ أَنْ يَخْتَارَ، وَلاَ لِلغَائِبِ أَنْ يَرُدَّ، وَإنَّمَا الشُّورَى لِلْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالاْنْصَارِ، فَإِنِ اجْتَمَعُوا عَلَى رَجُل وَسَمَّوْهُ إِمَاماً كَانَ ذلِكَ لله رِضىً، فَإِنْ خَرَجَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِمْ خَارِجٌ بِطَعْن أَوْبِدْعَة رَدُّوهُ إِلَى مَاخَرَجَ منه، فَإِنْ أَبَى قَاتَلُوهُ عَلَى اتِّبَاعِهِ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَوَلاَّهُ اللهُ مَا تَوَلَّى

Any unbiased person can clearly see that Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) is using the word IMAM for his 3 predecessors (Hz. Abu Bakr, Hz. Umar bin Al Khattab and Hz. Uthman bin Affan (may Allah Be pleased with them).

Now refer to Arabic version – the actual words uttered by Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him).

“If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.”

He used the word IMAM – Well knowing all the meanings and implications of this word.

Letter 58 Nahjul Balagha

A letter sent by Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin.

I am posting Letter 58 from Nahjul Balagha in 2 parts

A letter sent by Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin.

Part One

The whole thing began thus that we and the Syrians met in an encounter although we believe in one and the same Allah and the same Prophet, and our message in Islam is the same. We did not want them to add anything in the belief in Allah or in acknowledging His Messenger nor did they want us to add any such thing. In fact, there was complete unity except that we differed on the question of `Uthman's blood while we were free of responsibility for it. We suggested to them to appease the situation by calming the temporary irritation and pacifying the people till matters settled down and stabilized when we would gain strength to put matters right. Letter 58 Nahjul Balagha

1) we believe in one and the same Allah and the same Prophet
2) and our message in Islam is the same
3) We did not want them to add anything in the belief in Allah or in acknowledging His Messenger
4) nor did they want us to add any such thing
5) In fact, there was complete unity (in belief)
6) except that we differed on the question of `Uthman's blood while we were free of responsibility for it.

The first 5 points clearly show that there were NO differences in Belief as Point 5 states: COMPLETE UNITY IN BELIEF!!!!!

In status/stature/superiority and Nobility Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was/is head over shoulders battles of Camel, Battle of Saffin and Battle of Nahrawan.

Important Note to consider that IMAMATE is not mentioned at all– Core Belief of Shias!!!!!!!!!!!

Part Two

“They however said that they would settle it by war. Thus, they refused our offer and consequently war spread its wings and came to stay. Its flames rose and became strong. When the war had bitten us as well as them and pierced its talons into us as well as them, they accepted what we had proposed to them.

So, we agreed to what they suggested and hastened to meet their request. In this way, the plea became clear to them and no excuse was left to them. Now, whoever among them adheres to this will be saved by Allah from ruin, and whoever shows obstinacy and insistence (on wrong) is the reverser whose heart has been blinded by Allah and evils will encircle his head.”

In Part Two Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) stated his righteousness and uprightness and that his opponents were obstinate and were seeking war.

There were no Shias as a religious group and neither was there any Sunni group. All were Muslims following the Commands of the Blessed Quran and Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).  There is no claim to Shia IMAMATE from supposedly first Imam of Shia!!!!!!

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

Please tear this apart if you think its wrong, add to it if you have relevant references, and correct it if you think it is lacking.

You posted this on Shia site, did you really expect genuine and critical response? I have done my best to tear your post at your request.

If you really want it to be blown to smithereens, then I suggest that post it on reputable Sunni site. Then seat back and watch the fireworks.

Your opening sentence You said:

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

The premise is simple, in order for Abu Bakr to be rightly guided, his term as Caliph must have been accepted by Fatima (عليه السلام) according to Sunni Accepted Hadith and Quran. I plan to show that ... 

Sunni source:

“When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, ‘O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.’ She answered, ‘Do you want me to give him permission?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ So, she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: ‘By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.’ So, he talked to her until she was pleased with him.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi, vol 6, page 301)

Shia source:

Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani writes in the context of interpreting Nahj-ul-Balaga: “Abu Bakr said to Fatima: Whatever belonged to your father, belongs to you as well. The Messenger of Allah kept something apart out of his personal share (fadak) and distributed the rest of it in the name of Allah. By Allah, I’ll do with you what he used to do with you. Fatima was pleased to hear these words, a confirmation of the Prophetic practice” Ibn Maytham al-Bahrani, Sharh Nahj-ul-Balaga, Vol.5, P. 107,109, Tehran

Hadith from Shia source – From Imam Muhammad Baqir (may Allah be pleased with him)

al-Tabrisi narrates from (Imam) Muhammad Baqir that when Usamah had left for Jihad when the Messenger of Allah passed away, the news reached Usamah (and) he returned with his army to Medinah. He (Usamah) saw a great number of people surrounding Abu Bakr; on seeing this, he went to question Ali ibn Abi Talib and asked: “What is this?” Ali ibn Abi Talib replied: “It is exactly what you are seeing!” Usamah asked: “Have you (also) given Baya’ah to him?” Ali ibn Abi Talib replied: “Yes.” (Al-Ihtejaj, Allama   Abu Mansur, Ahmad al-Tabrisi p.50: Printed Mashhad, Iran)

Sunni source:

It has been narrated on the authority of 'A'isha that Fatima and 'Abbas approached Abu Bakr, soliciting transfer of the legacy of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) to them. At that time, they were demanding his (Holy Prophet's) lands at Fadak and his share from Khaibar. Abu Bakr said to them:

I have heard from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). Then he quoted the hadith having nearly the same meaning as the one which has been narrated by Uqail on the authority of al-Zuhri (and which his gone before) except that in his version he said: Then 'Ali stood up, extolled the merits of Abu Bakr mentioned his superiority, and his earlier acceptance of Islam. Then he walked to Abu Bakr and swore allegiance to him. (At this) people turned towards 'Ali and said: you have done the right thing. And they became favourably inclined to 'Ali after he had adopted the proper course of action.  Sahih Muslim 1759b

 

You quoted just one sentence from the above hadith (Sahih al-Bukhari 4240) just to make your point. I’m giving the link to the above hadith – its long but read it.

https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4240

So `Ali sought reconciliation with Abu Bakr and gave him an oath of allegiance. `Ali had not given the oath of allegiance during those months (i.e. the period between the Prophet's death and Fatima's death). `Ali sent someone to Abu Bakr saying, "Come to us, but let nobody come with you," as he disliked that `Umar should come, `Umar said (to Abu Bakr), "No, by Allah, you shall not enter upon them alone " Abu Bakr said, "What do you think they will do to me? By Allah, I will go to them' So Abu Bakr entered upon them, and then `Ali uttered Tashah-hud and said (to Abu Bakr), "We know well your superiority and what Allah has given you, and we are not jealous of the good what Allah has bestowed upon you, but you did not consult us in the question of the rule and we thought that we have got a right in it because of our near relationship to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ." Thereupon Abu Bakr's eyes flowed with tears. And when Abu Bakr spoke, he said, "By Him in Whose Hand my soul is to keep good relations with the relatives of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is dearer to me than to keep good relations with my own relatives. But as for the trouble which arose between me and you about his property, I will do my best to spend it according to what is good, and will not leave any rule or regulation which I saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) following, in disposing of it, but I will follow." On that `Ali said to Abu Bakr, "I promise to give you the oath of allegiance in this after noon." So, when Abu Bakr had offered the Zuhr prayer, he ascended the pulpit and uttered the Tashah-hud and then mentioned the story of `Ali and his failure to give the oath of allegiance, and excused him, accepting what excuses he had offered; Then `Ali (got up) and praying (to Allah) for forgiveness, he uttered Tashah-hud, praised Abu Bakr's right, and said, that he had not done what he had done because of jealousy of Abu Bakr or as a protest of that Allah had favoured him with. `Ali added, "But we used to consider that we too had some right in this affair (of rulership) and that he (i.e. Abu Bakr) did not consult us in this matter, and therefore caused us to feel sorry." On that all the Muslims became happy and said, "You have done the right thing." The Muslims then became friendly with `Ali as he returned to what the people had done (i.e. giving the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr). - Sahih al-Bukhari 4240 & Sahih Muslim 1759a

Finally, As Hz. Abu Bakr (may be pleased be with him) was the main target of your criticism and recriminations, history and facts on ground debunk all that you attributed to him.

Allah Almighty has promised to make Islam dominate all other religions destroy and humiliate anyone who against Allah Almighty’s Will. Hz. Abu Bakr (may be pleased be with him) honoured to be lead nascent Muslim Ummah which he did very successfully. Even Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may be pleased be with him) has attested to this. And when he passed away he was honoured to be buried in the same chamber just a half a meter away from the best of Creation, the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). What an honour!!!

For last 1500 odd years all those millions and millions of believers who had (and those billions who come later till end of time) the privilege of performing Hajj or Umrah and then visit Madinah Al Munawwarah to pay their respects and salutations to the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). They only have to take half a meter step to the right to show their reverence, respect and acknowledge his great service to Islam and the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). What an honour!!!

All the great men in history can’t please everyone and will have dissidents for their own reasons but this effects not them not. Just like if one spits at the moon in its full glory. It will not touch the moon but will fall back on his face!

On 8/18/2022 at 11:27 PM, Mohamad_ali said:

I have used Sunni reference because I generally believe that in order to bring people to your perspective you have to start from an agreed position. I don't think that as Shi'a we would disagree with the general message even if we disagree with the entire ref hadith

Salam

Likewise, I have used material from Shia sources as much I could find to counter points put forward by you.

Wa ‘alaykum Salaam warehmatullahe wabarakatuhu With best wishes for you and your dear family

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/16/2022 at 1:29 AM, Debate follower said:

this is typical distortion of sources & translation by wahabists which you have censored main part in saying  of Ibn Maytham 

Quote


وروی أنّه لمّا سمع کلامها أحمد اللَّه وأثنى علیه وصلَّى على رسوله ، ثمّ قال : یا خیرة النساء وابنة خیر الآباء واللَّه ما عدوت رأى رسول اللَّه صلَّى اللَّه علیه وآله ولا عملت إلَّا بأمره ، وإنّ الرائد لا یکذب أهله قد قلت فأبلغت وأغلظت فأهجرت فغفر اللَّه لنا ولک أمّا بعد فقد دفعت ألَّه رسول اللَّه صلَّى اللَّه علیه وآله ودابّته وحذاه إلى علىّ علیه السّلام ، وأمّا ما سوى ذلک فإنّی سمعت رسول اللَّه صلَّى اللَّه علیه وآله یقول : إنّا معاشر الأنبیاء لا نورّث ذهبا ولا فضّة ولا أرضا ولا عقارا ولا دارا ولکنّا نورّث الإیمان والحکمة والعلم والسنّة ، وقد عملت بما أمرنی وسمعت . فقالت: إنّ رسول اللَّه صلَّى اللَّه علیه وآله قد وهبها لی . قال : فمن یشهد بذلک . فجاء علیّ بن أبی طالب وأمّ أیمن فشهدا لها بذلک فجاء عمر بن الخطاب وعبد الرحمن بن عوف فشهدا أنّ رسول اللَّه صلَّى اللَّه علیه وآله یقسّمها.فقال أبو بکر: صدقت یا ابنة رسول اللَّه وصدق علىّ وصدقت أمّ أیمن وصدق عمر وصدق عبد الرحمن، وذلک أنّ لک ما لأبیک کان رسول اللَّه صلَّى اللَّه علیه وآله یأخذ من فدک قوتکم ویقسّم الباقی ویحمل منه فی سبیل اللَّه، ولک على اللَّه أن أن أصنع بها کما کان یصنع . فرضیت بذلک وأخذت العهد علیه به.


البحرانی،‌ مثیم بن علی بن میثم (المتوفى679هـ)، شرح نهج البلاغة، ج5، ص101، الناشر: دار الثقلین، الطبعة: الأولى، 1420 هـ - 1999 م.

 

the word of "وروی " 

 

at start of narration Ibn maytham by mentioning this word "وروی"shows that this narration is too weak which wahabist by Tadlis (subreption) have tried to show it as a shia belief from a shia source .

اثبات دروغ بستن وهابیت در استناد به منابع شیعه (valiasr-aj.com)

https://www.valiasr-aj.com/persian/shownews.php?idnews=10869

On 9/16/2022 at 1:14 AM, Debate follower said:

) Tulayha ibn Khuwaylid ibn Nawfal al-Asadi – He undertook the first attack on the caliphate, in an attempt to capture Medina, the capital of the caliphate.

Hz. Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) took part in battle to defeat Tulayha’s army.

In July 632, Abu Bakr raised an army mainly from Banu Hashim, a clan within the tribe of Quraysh. Ali ibn Abi Talib, Talha ibn Ubaidullah and Zubair ibn al-Awam (may Allah be pleased with them), were each appointed as commander of one-third of the newly organized force. They fought the Battle of Zhu Qissa against the forces of Tulayha and his followers as they prepared to launch an attack on Medina during the Ridda wars. The Rashidun commanders held until they were reinforced by Abu Bakr. Tulayha was defeated and his forces were driven back to Zhu Hussa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulayha

this is a batalant lie against Imam Ali (عليه السلام) by wahabists likewise you which do any fabrication & forging in history to prove their nonsense because all of muslims whether Sunni or Shia muslims agree on that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) has not participated in any battle during reign of any of three caliphs which everyone likewise you can edit wikipedia in order to prove their nonsense .

rest of your posts are just repeating your nonsense about letter of 6 in Nahjulbalgha which whole of it multiple times have been refuted by everyone. :blabla:

 

 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/16/2022 at 1:09 AM, Debate follower said:

ow refer to Arabic version Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha – the actual words uttered by Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him).

إِنَّهُ بَايَعَنِي الْقَوْمُ الَّذِينَ بَايَعُوا أَبَا بَكْر وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمانَ عَلَى مَا بَايَعُوهُمْ عَلَيْهِ، فَلَمْ يَكُنْ لِلشَّاهِدِ أَنْ يَخْتَارَ، وَلاَ لِلغَائِبِ أَنْ يَرُدَّ، وَإنَّمَا الشُّورَى لِلْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالاْنْصَارِ، فَإِنِ اجْتَمَعُوا عَلَى رَجُل وَسَمَّوْهُ إِمَاماً كَانَ ذلِكَ لله رِضىً، فَإِنْ خَرَجَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِمْ خَارِجٌ بِطَعْن أَوْبِدْعَة رَدُّوهُ إِلَى مَاخَرَجَ منه، فَإِنْ أَبَى قَاتَلُوهُ عَلَى اتِّبَاعِهِ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَوَلاَّهُ اللهُ مَا تَوَلَّى.

“If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.”

He used the word IMAM – Well knowing all the meanings and implications of this word.

Imam Ali (AS.) always demanded his divine right for the caliphate

Imam Ali (AS.) always demanded his divine right for the caliphate | Shia Studies' World Assembly

https://shiastudies.com/en/2634/imam-ali-as-always-demanded-his-divine-right-for-the-caliphate/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members

@Debate follower you can bring all kind of weak hadiths to back up your argument. But let’s be real your Sunni view about ahlulbayt is weak even your own texts mention it like ahlul kisa. Even some of the sunnis denies that battle of the camel happend because they know that Aisha was wrong and even disobeyed the Quran. they know if they acknowledge the battle of the camel they have to acknowledge that ahlulbayt only applies to imam Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain. Once you know who the ahlulbayt is you know who is right. It’s that simple. 

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...