can i be a shia and not curse the sahabah

[AMIR33]

Asalamu Alaykum warahmatuLLAH 

I am a sunni who have studies deeply about the Ahlul Bayt for almost a year and I have decided to follow their way , but I am struggling with the cursing of the sahabah part I mean I understand that very small percent of them might have done not right by the Ahlul Bayt  but can I just be diplomatic about what they have done and leave them to their LORD and just follow the path of Ahlul Bayt.

wasalamu Alaykum ahbabi warahmatuLLAHI wabarakatuh

 

 

[AMIR33]

I meant studied .. sorry abt that

 

[Abu Nur]

38 minutes ago, AMIR33 said:

Asalamu Alaykum warahmatuLLAH 

I am a sunni who have studies deeply about the Ahlul Bayt for almost a year and I have decided to follow their way , but I am struggling with the cursing of the sahabah part I mean I understand that very small percent of them might have done not right by the Ahlul Bayt  but can I just be diplomatic about what they have done and leave them to their LORD and just follow the path of Ahlul Bayt.

wasalamu Alaykum ahbabi warahmatuLLAHI wabarakatuh

 

 

Salaam Aleikum, yes you can do that. It is hard for Sunnis who convert to Shia to do such a thing because of their deep attachment to them.

[AMIR33]

yeah its so difficult to even think ,"how dare x do this to FATIMAH AZZAHRA "  or other scenarios after u spent all ur life putting them on a ... ... ALLAH knows better 

 

[Panzerwaffe]

2 hours ago, AMIR33 said:

Asalamu Alaykum warahmatuLLAH 

I am a sunni who have studies deeply about the Ahlul Bayt for almost a year and I have decided to follow their way , but I am struggling with the cursing of the sahabah part I mean I understand that very small percent of them might have done not right by the Ahlul Bayt  but can I just be diplomatic about what they have done and leave them to their LORD and just follow the path of Ahlul Bayt.

wasalamu Alaykum ahbabi warahmatuLLAHI wabarakatuh

 

 

Why do you struggle in coming to terms with it ?

[Abu_Zahra]

Wa alaikum as salam yes, the aimmah (عليه السلام) didn't perform such an act therefore it is not from their teachings. 

 

[GEU_40]

18 hours ago, AMIR33 said:

I understand that very small percent of them might have done not right by the Ahlul Bayt

It's understandable if you are unsure. 

However, suppose that you find beyond reasonable doubt that certain people close to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) hurt him or his Ahlul Bayt ((عليه السلام)) and never repented by words or deeds. What will you do according to the Quran and Sunnah?

Edited February 7 by Sabrejet

[Sirius_Bright]

Imagine yourself in this situation: What would you do to a person who slapped your Mother and broke her ribs her, and put a rope on your father's neck. 

Forgive me if the scenario hurt your feelings. 

[Abu_Zahra]

1 hour ago, Sirius_Bright said:

Imagine yourself in this situation: What would you do to a person who slapped your Mother and broke her ribs her, and put a rope on your father's neck. 

Forgive me if the scenario hurt your feelings. 

This narrative isn't found in authentic narrations though so the question isn't exactly valid

Even if you believe this,the answer is simple: we will do what the aimmah (عليه السلام) did

 

 

 

 

[Shian e Ali]

On 2/6/2025 at 3:51 PM, Abu Nur said:

Salaam Aleikum, yes you can do that. It is hard for Sunnis who convert to Shia to do such a thing because of their deep attachment to them.

For some maybe, not all. It's usually a problem for the new ones because they're not completely aware of their doings, or they have failed to understand them in a more empathetic way. Sooner or later, most pass on from the stage of Denial to Acceptance. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 2/6/2025 at 11:39 PM, AMIR33 said:

the sahabah

Salam thanks a million for searching for truth however at first definition of Sahaba for Shias is different from definition of sunnis which shia Muslism on't curse Sahaba who are shaba by their definition but on the the other hand curse enemies od Ahlulabyt (عليه السلام) which maybe some of them have been categorized as Sahaba by Sunni definition while Shias have not  recognized them as Sahabs .

Why do Shias curse the Sahabah and khalifahs?

Concise answer

Basically, Shias believe that when it comes to Adalah, the Sahaba are like every other normal person. Just because one has been with the Prophet for a while doesn’t necessarily mean that he is going to always be adel (righteous). Merely being with the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) doesn’t do any good for one’s adalah unless it shows itself in his actions and behavior. Therefore, the criterion for being adel is one’s actions and conduct. If it accords with Islamic standards, that person is adel, and on the contrary if it doesn’t, he isn’t. This criterion corresponds with the Quran and the tradition of the Holy Prophet of Islam (p.b.u.h), and also corresponds with the realities of history. In addition, the historical evidence that we will cite in our detailed answer, also emphasizes on this point.

Detailed Answer

One of the accusations that Shias have always faced from their opposers is that they have a hidden hatred and enmity towards the Prophet’s companions (Sahaba). Yet, a realistic look at the matter, far from any bias, gives us the fact that this is a false accusation.

Detailed Answer.........https://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/en2588

The Concept of Ṣahāba and ʿAdala from a Shia Perspective

https://www.almahdi.edu/sahaba-shia

Chapter Four: Shi’a rejection of the Sahaba

Quote

, the well known Sunni scholar, Maulana Wahidu ‘z Zaman of Hyderabad Deccan explains the point:

“Those that sat in the company of Rasulullah (s) are true Sahaba. Those deserving of the title ‘Sahaba’ are those that bore love and respect of Rasulullah (s) and his Ahl’ul bayt (عليه السلام). The title ‘Sahaba’ does not suffice, we shall cite an example:

‘A King has some servants, on account of their love for their king they also love one another. Then one of the servants rebels against the King, he kills the Kings family, relations and friends, and becomes their enemy. In light of such facts should we STILL love the servant, on the sole basis that he was the kings servant?”
Anwaru ‘l-lughah Volume 14 page 20

Earlier on in the same book Zaman states:

“The verses and hadith praising the Sahaba refers to those that sat in the midst of Rasulullah (s) and showed love and respect towards his Ahl’ul bayt and supported them”.
Anwaru ‘l-lughah Volume 14 page 10

Shia scholar Allamah Sayyid Asad Haider writing on the Shi’a aqeedah on the Sahaba states:

“The Shi’a of the Ahl’ul bayt respect Rasulullah’s Sahaba, they do not play down respect for them, but when following the life of Rasulullah (s) they stress that the Shari’a applies equally to Sahaba and non Sahaba – the Sahaba’s position and status is in accordance with their deeds and actions”.
Taken from al Sahabeeyat fi Nazhar Shi’a page 32, printed in Egypt

Quote

Hatred did not just end there Mu’awiya’s hatred of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was such that as Khalifa he made the cursing of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) a compulsory practice.

Maulana Sayyid Abu’l Ala Maudoodi records this fact in his “Khilafat wa Mulukiyaat”. On page 174 he writes:

“Ibn Kathir in al Bidayah records that one unlawful and outrageous practice started by Mu’awiya was that he and his governors would curse Hadhrath Ali during the Friday sermon from the Imam’s position. This took such an extreme that this practised even took place in the Mosque of the Prophet, in front of the grave of the Prophet (saws), the cursing of the most beloved relative would take place, in the presence of Hadhrath Ali’s family who would hear this abuse with their own ears.”
also:
1.Tabari Volume 4 page 188
2. Ibn Athir Volume 3 page 234
3. al Bidayah Volume 8 page 259 and Volume 9 page 80

https://shiapen.com/blog/chapter-four-shi-a-rejection-of-the-sahaba

Edited February 8 by Ashvazdanghe

[Ashvazdanghe]

10 hours ago, Abu_Zahra said:

This narrative isn't found in authentic narrations though so the question isn't exactly valid

Salam this is a proven fact from authentic narrations even from sunni sources which you can't  deny it for compromising . 

[Ashvazdanghe]

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235010807-which-sahaba-are-respected-by-shia/

[Abu_Zahra]

3 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam this is a proven fact from authentic narrations even from sunni sources which you can't  deny it for compromising . 

Wa alaikum as salam 

Bring forward the authentic narrations from our books. 

Jazakumullah 

[GEU_40]

4 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam this is a proven fact from authentic narrations even from sunni sources which you can't  deny it for compromising .

Salam brother.

Trying to change Mahdivist's mind is an exercise in futility. IMO it's better that we wait for OP's response before this thread is derailed.

[Abu Hadi]

On 2/6/2025 at 3:09 PM, AMIR33 said:

Asalamu Alaykum warahmatuLLAH 

I am a sunni who have studies deeply about the Ahlul Bayt for almost a year and I have decided to follow their way , but I am struggling with the cursing of the sahabah part I mean I understand that very small percent of them might have done not right by the Ahlul Bayt  but can I just be diplomatic about what they have done and leave them to their LORD and just follow the path of Ahlul Bayt.

wasalamu Alaykum ahbabi warahmatuLLAHI wabarakatuh

 

 

What  you have to understand is that ideas and concepts that were embedded into your brain when you first started life, i.e. childhood before maturity, are always going to be there in some form. Your mind holds onto these things because they helped you to survive in the beginning, before you had additional skills (reading skills, mathematical skills, social skills, a social network, etc). That is also why an trauma that happened to you during this time will affect you in some way for the rest of your life. 

Although these things will always be in your brain, you can manage them if you are aware of what is going on. For example, I was raised as a child in the Christian Church. As many people know, music and singing are a big part of Christianity and the Christian Church Service on Sundays. Some Churches use modern music with rock bands, etc, and some (like the one I grew up in) use older style music like Hymns and Choir Music. There is a very good reason why they use music so much. It is because music is one of the only forms of artistic expression that bypass the logical centers of your brain and effect the emotional centers directly. That is why people connect music to emotions directly and that is also why music is used to manipulate people emotionally. That is one of the reasons why many marjaa' say it is haram, because if used by those who have an evil agenda (i.e. most governments in the current world), it can be used to manipulate the masses into going against their own logic and their own interests. 

Anyway, even today, and I have been muslim for over 20 years and I have never been to a Church Service in that time (except for once when I attended the funeral of my grandmother), when I hear those hymns and those songs it still affects me emotionally in a not so good, non rational way. I know which ones they are and that is why I avoid them. 

It is the same thing with the Sahaba as imagined by Sunni thought. The myth that all Sahaba were good and had good intentions is something that is embedded in the followers since childhood. They are told not to say anything bad about any Sahaba and when anything bad is said, it triggers a reflex in their brain that is emotional and not rational. You know this because you studied about the Sahaba objectively, and if you study the subject, objectively you can see that is is very, very implausible and probably impossible that a community as large as the Sahaba (i.e. anyone who had personal contact with Rasoulallah), which probably numbered in the tens of thousands, were all good and perfect and had no hypocrisy or bad intentions for which they would be condemned. It doesn't fit with reality, not just based on hadith, even from Sunni books, but from most people's personal lives.

Most people know or have come in contact with at least a few people who are completely bad and evil. Some unfortunate people come in contact with these kinds of people on a daily basis. So we can't imagine that in the community of Medina, even amoung people who were associated with Rasoulallah, that there wasn't at least a few who fit into this category. There is no ayat in Quran that even hints at this type of immunity and in fact there are several verses in the Holy Quran that explicitly state that there were hypocrites in Medina (hypocrites plural, the Arabic plural meaning more than 2). There are many other facts and this is the rational argument which is rock solid if you actually delve into this subject, which unfortunately most of our Sunni brothers will never delve into in any kind of depth. If they did, they would come to the same conclusion. 

What you have to understand is that this is an emotional reflex and not anything else. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) wishes for us to follow our aql (rationality and intelligence) and let that be the decider between right and wrong and not our emotional reflexes. We can manage our emotional reflexes via our aql (i.e. rational arguments and proofs). This is actually what happens when people talk about going to 'Therapy', i.e. talking therapy. They pinpoint the areas where there emotional reflexes are causing them to act irrationally, i.e. agains their own interests, and they use logical proofs and arguments to manage these reflexes, that is all it is. You can pay a therapist for this or you can do it yourself for free, lol. 

At the same time, we as Shia must be sensitive to the fact that our Sunni brothers and sisters have this reflect and not taunt them or provoke them without a good reason. This is why most marjaa' do not allow cursing of Aisha and Hafsa or the first three Caliphs (Umar, Abu Bakr, Uthman) since these are the ones that are most closely associated with Rasoulallah amoung the Sahaba that are imagined to be good and immune from vice by our brothers and sisters. It is also possible that these personalities did have some good qualities and good actions but we believe (as Shia) that their bad actions were so bad (Aisha launching a war against the Caliph of her time, i.e. Imam Ali((عليه السلام)) out of jelousy and as a result thousands of mumineen were killed, Umar and Abu Bakr doing a political coup to deprive Imam Ali((عليه السلام)) of his right which was ordered by Rasoulallah(i.e. the Caliphate)) that they eclipse completely their good deeds and good qualities. These personalities were not good people, because of those deeds and do not deserve any praise or reverence. 

The actual cursing (la'nat) should only be done as a method of doing Tabara (disassociation) to those who were directly involved in the slaughter and severe oppression of Imams of Ahl Al Bayt((عليه السلام)) and their followers. This includes Muawiya(la), Yazid(la), and others. At the same time, it is not recommended to make a show of this cursing and it is usually only done in situations that are semi-private, i.e. personal dua and gatherings, such as Majalis for Imam Hussein((عليه السلام)), where almost exclusively Shia are present. This is considered having good aklaq, again not to antagonize our brothers and sisters. 

Those who publicly curse the wives of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) or the three and make up stupid stories about them (like the ones you probably heard) which are not backed by evidence or authentic hadith are agents of the Shayateen and are probably on the CIA/MI6 payroll and we do Tabarra (disassociation) from them as well because their goal is not to do Tabarra from enemies of Ahl Al Bayt((عليه السلام)), but to cause fitna amoung the Muslim Ummah and the only beneficiary of this fitna is the Taghut. 

If you have any other questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact me directly. Salam 

Edited February 8 by Abu Hadi

[Ashvazdanghe]

20 hours ago, Abu_Zahra said:

Wa alaikum as salam 

Bring forward the authentic narrations from our books. 

Jazakumullah 

Salam

Although historical sources have narrated the feticide of Muhsin in the event of attacking the house of Fatima (a), al-Ikhtisas attributed to al-Shaykh al-Mufid, mentioned it in the event of the objection to the confiscation of Fadak and wrote that in that event, after 'Umar asked for the edict of Abu Bakr, Fatima (a) did not give it to him and 'Umar kicked her while she was pregnant with Muhsin (a) and by that kick, Muhsin (a) was killed. Then, 'Umar slapped Fatima (a) on the face, took the edict and torn it.^[34]

[34] Mufīd, al-Ikhtiṣāṣ, p. 185

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

 

Document No. 6

Shaykh Ahmad Tabarsi (6th century) mentions a document as follows:

“Abu Bakr said to Qunfudh: If he (Ali) comes out, it is all right. If not, attack him. Again if he refuses to give allegiance, burn the house with its occupants.

Qunfudh set out with his associates as ordered, attacked the house without warning, entered it and put a black rope around Ali’ neck.

Then they took Ali to Abu Bakr. The black rope was around his neck. Umar was standing with a naked sword. Around Abu Bakr were sitting with his companions holding swords.

Umar threatened him and said: Do Bay’at.

Ali answered: What if I didn’t?

Umar answered: We shall kill you disrespectfully.

Then Ali before doing Bay’at shouted:32 Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me.

Then he extended his hand and did Abu Bakr’s Bay’at.”33

32.It means bringing the hand of Abu Bakr to touch the closed fist of Amirul Momineen (‘a)
33.Tabarsi: Ihtijaaj, Vol. 1, Pgs. 83-84.

Quote

Document No. 4

Allamah Majlisi (d. 1111) narrates similar to that which Tabarsi has mentioned in book Ihtijaaj. 28

“Then he said: Get up! O Ibn Abi Talib and do Bay’at.

(Ali) asked: What if I don’t?

(Umar) said: If so by God, we shall kill you.

He (Ali) protested to them three times. Then he extended his hand while his fist was closed. Over his fist, Abu Bakr hit his hand. This was the Bay’at they could get from Ali but they were content at this much.

Before doing this Bay’at Ali shouted while the rope was round his neck:

Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me.” 29

In another document, which is very much similar to the above, the text runs thus:

“…Then he extended his hand without opening the fist. Abu Bakr hit over it by his hand. Abu Bakr was content at that. Then (Ali) went home.” 30

29.Allamah Majlisi: Biharul Anwar, Vol. 28, Pg. 276.
30.Ibid. Vol. 28, Pg. 301.

https://al-islam.org/victim-lost-saqifah-revised-edition-comprehensive-additions-ali-labbaf/discourse-2-efforts-obtain

 

19 hours ago, Sabrejet said:

Salam brother.

Trying to change Mahdivist's mind is an exercise in futility. IMO it's better that we wait for OP's response before this thread is derailed.

Salam Yeah He will derail it by turning it into offtopic dispute about slapping or not slapping . 

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/5790-imam-alis-as-allegiance-to-first-caliphs/

[Ashvazdanghe]

20 hours ago, Abu_Zahra said:

Wa alaikum as salam 

Bring forward the authentic narrations from our books. 

Jazakumullah 

Salam

Although historical sources have narrated the feticide of Muhsin in the event of attacking the house of Fatima (a), al-Ikhtisas attributed to al-Shaykh al-Mufid, mentioned it in the event of the objection to the confiscation of Fadak and wrote that in that event, after 'Umar asked for the edict of Abu Bakr, Fatima (a) did not give it to him and 'Umar kicked her while she was pregnant with Muhsin (a) and by that kick, Muhsin (a) was killed. Then, 'Umar slapped Fatima (a) on the face, took the edict and torn it.^[34]

[34] Mufīd, al-Ikhtiṣāṣ, p. 185

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

 

Document No. 6

Shaykh Ahmad Tabarsi (6th century) mentions a document as follows:

“Abu Bakr said to Qunfudh: If he (Ali) comes out, it is all right. If not, attack him. Again if he refuses to give allegiance, burn the house with its occupants.

Qunfudh set out with his associates as ordered, attacked the house without warning, entered it and put a black rope around Ali’ neck.

Then they took Ali to Abu Bakr. The black rope was around his neck. Umar was standing with a naked sword. Around Abu Bakr were sitting with his companions holding swords.

Umar threatened him and said: Do Bay’at.

Ali answered: What if I didn’t?

Umar answered: We shall kill you disrespectfully.

Then Ali before doing Bay’at shouted:32 Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me.

Then he extended his hand and did Abu Bakr’s Bay’at.”33

32.It means bringing the hand of Abu Bakr to touch the closed fist of Amirul Momineen (‘a)
33.Tabarsi: Ihtijaaj, Vol. 1, Pgs. 83-84.

Quote

Document No. 4

Allamah Majlisi (d. 1111) narrates similar to that which Tabarsi has mentioned in book Ihtijaaj. 28

“Then he said: Get up! O Ibn Abi Talib and do Bay’at.

(Ali) asked: What if I don’t?

(Umar) said: If so by God, we shall kill you.

He (Ali) protested to them three times. Then he extended his hand while his fist was closed. Over his fist, Abu Bakr hit his hand. This was the Bay’at they could get from Ali but they were content at this much.

Before doing this Bay’at Ali shouted while the rope was round his neck:

Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me.” 29

In another document, which is very much similar to the above, the text runs thus:

“…Then he extended his hand without opening the fist. Abu Bakr hit over it by his hand. Abu Bakr was content at that. Then (Ali) went home.” 30

29.Allamah Majlisi: Biharul Anwar, Vol. 28, Pg. 276.
30.Ibid. Vol. 28, Pg. 301.

https://al-islam.org/victim-lost-saqifah-revised-edition-comprehensive-additions-ali-labbaf/discourse-2-efforts-obtain

 

20 hours ago, Sabrejet said:

Salam brother.

Trying to change Mahdivist's mind is an exercise in futility. IMO it's better that we wait for OP's response before this thread is derailed.

Salam Yeah He will derail it by turning it into offtopic dispute about slapping or not slapping . 

 

Edited February 9 by Ashvazdanghe

[Abu_Zahra]

@Ashvazdanghethanks I will look into it inshaAllah 

[Ibn Tayyar]

On 2/7/2025 at 11:13 AM, Abu_Zahra said:

Wa alaikum as salam yes, the aimmah (عليه السلام) didn't perform such an act therefore it is not from their teachings. 

 

Who said the A'immah never cursed their enemies? We literally have authentic narrations commanding us to curse and abuse the innovators, and some of these "sahabah" fall into these categories, such as this famous & authentic hadith.

“The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, ‘When you find the people of doubt and innovation after me, show your dissassociation from them and increase your insults against them, speaking against them, and exposing them, so that they do not corrupt Islam, and (so that) people be warned against them and avoid learning their innovations. Allah will record good deeds for you because of that and elevate your ranks in the Hereafter.’”

https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/2/1/163/4

We even have hadiths pertaining specifically to cursing the Shaykhayn.

‘What were the children of Ya'qub ((عليه السلام)), were they prophets?’ He said: ‘No, but they were the grandchildren of the children of the Prophets, and they did not depart from the world except as happy, repentant, and remembered what they had done, and the Shaykhayn departed from the world, they did not repent nor did they ever remember what they had done to the Commander of The Faithful ((عليه السلام)), so upon these two be the curse of Allah, the angels, and the people altogether.‘

https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/8/1/343/1

And other similar reliable hadiths:

https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/8/1/340/1

In the Qur'an, there are numerous Verses pertaining to cursing the enemies of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

Indeed, those who abuse Allāh and His Messenger - Allāh has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment. [33:57]

We know from authentic narrations that those who abuse the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) have abused the Prophet (saww), and therefore have abused Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and are worthy of cursing.

Finally, the following is part of an authentic hadith on those who "refrain" from engaging in bara'ah in the form of cursing.

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: Whoever refrains from cursing the one who is cursed by Allah [considering it a sin] then upon him be the curse of Allah.

https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/9/3/83/8

[guest 2025]

It's funny. We follow the Imams and take them as role models, yet they didn't curse them. If anyone had a right to curse Aisha it would be Imam Ali (عليه السلام). Yet even after she waged a literal war against him, he did not curse her. In fact he was respectful and polite. 

Are we upset with them? Yes. Very much. But we must have class.

YOU FOLLOW THE IMAMS AND DO WHAT THEY DID, BEWARE OF YOUR PERSONAL OPINIONS

 

[Abu Hadi]

If our Sunni brothers and sisters sincerely want to understand the main difference between us, I would highly recommend this series. No cursing in it. Serious and academic by a renowned alim, and it's in English

 

[Sirius_Bright]

People do not understand one thing - Cursing is not a bad thing. Infact it's a part of belief. Your belief is not complete without Tabarrah. 

Allah has cursed in the Holy Qur'an. Ahlulbayt (ams) has cursed their Mukhalifeen at many instances. 

https://shiapen.com/blog/chapter-two-the-obligation-to-love-the-messenger-of-allah-s-and-his-immaculate-household-as

https://shiapen.com/blog/chapter-four-qur-anic-proof-of-bara

[Guest Awais]

In Sermon 228 of Nahj al-Balāgha, Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) eloquently praises an individual with very high regard. The text sermon is as follows;

لله بلادُ فُلاَن، فَلَقَدْ قَوَّمَ الاْوَدَ، وَدَاوَى الْعَمَدَ، وَأَقَامَ السُّنَّةَ، وَخَلَّفَ الْفِتْنَةَ! ذَهَبَ نَقِيَّ الثَّوْبِ، قَلِيلَ الْعَيْبِ، أَصَابَ خَيْرَهَا، وَسَبَقَ شَرَّهَا، أَدَّى إِلَى اللهِ طَاعَتَهُ، وَاتَّقَاهُ بِحَقِّهِ، رَحَلَ وَتَرَكَهُمْ فِي طُرُق مَتَشَعِّبَة، لاَ يَهْتَدِي بِهَا الضَّالُّ، وَلاَ يَسْتَيْقِنُ الْمُهْتَدِي

May Allah reward such and such man, who straightened the curve, cured the disease, abandoned mischief and established the sunnah. He departed (from this world) with untarnished clothes and little shortcomings. He achieved good (of this world) and remained safe from its evils. He offered Allah’s obedience and feared Him as He deserved. He went away and left the people in dividing ways wherein the misled cannot obtain guidance and the guided cannot attain certainty [1].

Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd al-Muʻtazilῑ, a prominent exegete of the compilation, strongly argues that the individual referred to in this sermon is the second caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab.

Throughout the centuries, Shiʻa scholars have developed strong sentiments surrounding the concept of imamate and caliphate. They developed a consensus of the illegitimacy of the caliphate for many reasons. Subsequently, if the Imam did praise the second caliph as Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd claims, this would imply that the developed consensus is completely, or to a certain extent, wrong.

This discussion will therefore elaborate on the different ideas and opinions of Shi’a scholars and exhibit the different possibilities surrounding the authenticity and the history of the sermon.

Since Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd sources al-Tabarῑ, a renowned historian, the authenticity of this narration can be debated by Sunni scholars and subsequently used in the discussions of imamate and caliphate. An example is demonstrated by Shaykh Muhammed Abduh, one of the leading scholars in al-Azhar University, Cairo, who in his exegesis of Nahj al-Balāgha, accepted Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd’s conclusions [2], and in turn used the sermon to justify the legitimacy of the caliphate. This brings us to the core question: Was Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) referring to Umar ibn al-Khattāb?

Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd presents three primary arguments which lead him to his conclusions. The first is surrounding the contents of an old manuscript, the second is with regards to the source of the narration and the final argument examines the content of the sermon itself.

Therefore the discussion will analyse each of these three arguments and the objections raised by Shi’a scholars.

Islamic Republic of Iran.

 

References

[1] Translation taken from; http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-227-may-allah-reward-such-and-such-man

[2] Abduh, Nahj al-Balāgha 2/465

[3] Fulān; such and such person

[4] Ibn Abῑ al-Hadῑd al-Muʻtazili, Sharh Nahj al-Balāgha 12/2

[5] Ijtihād; in this context; the giving of independent judgment concerning matters relating to religious sciences.

[6] Sharh; Exegesis

[7] Abd Al-Zahrāʼ, S. Masādir Nahj al-Balāghah 3/172

[8] Al-Naqawi, Miftāh al-Saʻada Fῑ Sharhi Nahj al-Balāgha 14/272

[9] Al-Tabarῑ, Tārῑkh 3/285; Translation from al-islam.org, Nahj al-Balāgha, under the commentary of Sermon 227.

[10] Al-Hākim, al-Mustadrak 1/385; Ibn Athῑr, al-Kāmil fῑ al-Tārῑkh 3/414; Ahmad, Musnad 1/188. Mughῑra actively engaged in the cursing of Alῑ ibn Abῑ Talib from the pulpits of Kūfa.

[11] For the full report, refer to al-Mūsawῑ’s, al-Nass wa al-Ijtihād, Chapter 57, Cancelling the penalty of al-Mughira and the Sunni sources therein.

[12] The Holy Quran 59:06 [13] Abd al-Zahrāʼ, Masādir Nahj al-Balāgha 3/173

[14] Ibn Kathῑr, Al-Kāmil fῑ al-Tārῑkh 2/437; It seems the narration in this print has been altered in comparison to the older 12 vol. 1966, Dār Sādir print. In the older print, It seems the author is unsure as to what exactly the Imam said.

[15] Al-Subhānῑ, Hiwār maʻ al-Shaykh Sālih ibn Abd al-Allah al-Darweish, 1/69

[16] Al-Namῑrῑ, Tārῑkh al-Madῑna 3/941

[17] Ibn Asākir, Tarῑkh Madῑna Damishq 44/457; The first seems to show that the Imam agreed to what the lady had said, the second shows that he rejected her comments completely.

[18] Ibn Kathῑr, al-Bidāya wa al-Nihāya 7/158

[19] Al-Shustarῑ, Bahj al-Sabāgha 9/482 referencing Nahj al-Balāgha Sermon 3

[20] Al-Bahrāni, Sharh Nahj al-Balāgha 4/672

[21] Al-Mughnῑyya, Fῑ Dhilāl Nahj al-Balāgha 3/329

[22] Mūhājῑr; the name given to those who migrated from Makka to Madῑna with the Prophet of Islam.

[23] Ansār; the name given to those who were residents of Madῑna during the time of the Prophet.

[24] Al-Balādharῑ, Ansāb al-Ashrāf 5/502 h.1291; Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd 12/259

[25] Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd 12/4

[26] Al-Rawῑndῑ, Minhāj al-Barāʻa fῑ Sharh Nahj al-Balāgha 2/402

[27] Al-Shirāzῑ, Tawdhῑh Nahj al-Balāgha 3/395

[28] Al-Muslim, Sahῑh, Bāb Talāq al-Thalāth, 4/183; alternatively  Chapter 2: Pronouncement of the Three Divorces, 9/3491-3

[29] Al-Bukhārῑ, Sahῑh, Kitāb al-Tarāwih 2/252; alternatively Praying at night in Ramadhān 3/32/227

[30] Al-Nass wa al-Ijtihād, Chapter 23 and 24, Changing the Adhān and the Sunni sources therein

[31] Al-Āmilῑ, Wasāʼil al-Shiʻa 8/46, hadith 10063; al-Tūsi, Tahdhῑb al-Ahkām Volume 3/70 Hadith 30

[32] For further references, one should refer to the works of al-Mūsawῑ; al-Nass wa al-Ijtihād, Chapter 2: Interpretation of Umar and his followers

[33] Dhann; an assumption, idea, or opinion.

Narrated by Ibn `Abbas (radiyallahu ‘anhuma):

“While I was standing amongst the people who were invoking Allah for `Umar Ibn Al Khattab (radiyallahu ‘anhu) who was lying (dead) on his bed, a man behind me rested his elbows on my shoulder and said, “O `Umar! May Allah bestow His Mercy on you. I always hoped that Allah will keep you with your two companions, for I often heard Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) saying, “I, Abu Bakr and `Umar were (somewhere). I, Abu Bakr and `Umar did (something). I, Abu Bakr and `Umar set out. So I hoped that Allah will keep you with both of them.” I turned back to see that the speaker was `Ali Ibn Abi Talib (radiyallahu ‘anhu)

Answer

This is part of a narration that is recorded in Sahih Bukhari, Hadith: 3677 and 3685.

 

[AMIR33]

On 2/7/2025 at 5:45 PM, Sabrejet said:

It's understandable if you are unsure. 

However, suppose that you find beyond reasonable doubt that certain people close to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) hurt him or his Ahlul Bayt ((عليه السلام)) and never repented by words or deeds. What will you do according to the Quran and Sunnah?

generally i despise any 1 who even saw the HABIB SAW in an unfreindly or hatefull manner if it is known that he didnt make tawbah and ALLAH knows my blood boils when i read or hear of the misdeeds against his blessed self or his family and for now my concept of a true muhaddith is not like u so put ur self in my shoes what will u do

and thank u WALLAHI for taking time to help me out JAZAKUMULLAHU khayral jaza`

 

[AMIR33]

On 2/9/2025 at 10:15 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam

Although historical sources have narrated the feticide of Muhsin in the event of attacking the house of Fatima (a), al-Ikhtisas attributed to al-Shaykh al-Mufid, mentioned it in the event of the objection to the confiscation of Fadak and wrote that in that event, after 'Umar asked for the edict of Abu Bakr, Fatima (a) did not give it to him and 'Umar kicked her while she was pregnant with Muhsin (a) and by that kick, Muhsin (a) was killed. Then, 'Umar slapped Fatima (a) on the face, took the edict and torn it.^[34]

[34] Mufīd, al-Ikhtiṣāṣ, p. 185

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

 

Document No. 6

Shaykh Ahmad Tabarsi (6th century) mentions a document as follows:

“Abu Bakr said to Qunfudh: If he (Ali) comes out, it is all right. If not, attack him. Again if he refuses to give allegiance, burn the house with its occupants.

Qunfudh set out with his associates as ordered, attacked the house without warning, entered it and put a black rope around Ali’ neck.

Then they took Ali to Abu Bakr. The black rope was around his neck. Umar was standing with a naked sword. Around Abu Bakr were sitting with his companions holding swords.

Umar threatened him and said: Do Bay’at.

Ali answered: What if I didn’t?

Umar answered: We shall kill you disrespectfully.

Then Ali before doing Bay’at shouted:32 Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak and had well-nigh slain me.

Then he extended his hand and did Abu Bakr’s Bay’at.”33

32.It means bringing the hand of Abu Bakr to touch the closed fist of Amirul Momineen (‘a)
33.Tabarsi: Ihtijaaj, Vol. 1, Pgs. 83-84.

https://al-islam.org/victim-lost-saqifah-revised-edition-comprehensive-additions-ali-labbaf/discourse-2-efforts-obtain

 

Salam Yeah He will derail it by turning it into offtopic dispute about slapping or not slapping . 

 

that period of time is not reported in a detailed manner from the sunni point of veiw starting from when the blessed beloved prophet SAW fall ill and couldnt lead the salah but a blurred image starts to form when u add up some hassan and some sahih ahadeeth and these ahadith are actually what led me here aslan 

 

[AMIR33]

On 2/8/2025 at 9:21 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam thanks a million for searching for truth however at first definition of Sahaba for Shias is different from definition of sunnis which shia Muslism on't curse Sahaba who are shaba by their definition but on the the other hand curse enemies od Ahlulabyt (عليه السلام) which maybe some of them have been categorized as Sahaba by Sunni definition while Shias have not  recognized them as Sahabs .

Why do Shias curse the Sahabah and khalifahs?

Concise answer

Basically, Shias believe that when it comes to Adalah, the Sahaba are like every other normal person. Just because one has been with the Prophet for a while doesn’t necessarily mean that he is going to always be adel (righteous). Merely being with the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) doesn’t do any good for one’s adalah unless it shows itself in his actions and behavior. Therefore, the criterion for being adel is one’s actions and conduct. If it accords with Islamic standards, that person is adel, and on the contrary if it doesn’t, he isn’t. This criterion corresponds with the Quran and the tradition of the Holy Prophet of Islam (p.b.u.h), and also corresponds with the realities of history. In addition, the historical evidence that we will cite in our detailed answer, also emphasizes on this point.

Detailed Answer

One of the accusations that Shias have always faced from their opposers is that they have a hidden hatred and enmity towards the Prophet’s companions (Sahaba). Yet, a realistic look at the matter, far from any bias, gives us the fact that this is a false accusation.

Detailed Answer.........https://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/en2588

The Concept of Ṣahāba and ʿAdala from a Shia Perspective

https://www.almahdi.edu/sahaba-shia

Chapter Four: Shi’a rejection of the Sahaba

Shia scholar Allamah Sayyid Asad Haider writing on the Shi’a aqeedah on the Sahaba states:

“The Shi’a of the Ahl’ul bayt respect Rasulullah’s Sahaba, they do not play down respect for them, but when following the life of Rasulullah (s) they stress that the Shari’a applies equally to Sahaba and non Sahaba – the Sahaba’s position and status is in accordance with their deeds and actions”.
Taken from al Sahabeeyat fi Nazhar Shi’a page 32, printed in Egypt

https://shiapen.com/blog/chapter-four-shi-a-rejection-of-the-sahaba

i am inclined to belive that the narrative about the last days of the blessed prophet SAW and the wilaya of Aliy AS was designed by the umayyad court , and i also lack trust for the figure in ummar's court knows as ka'b al ahbar and it was proven that he had a minber to speak while it is literally in his name that he was a rabbi and ALLAH knows abt his heart but these reasons push me to belive that some of  the historical narrations abt the events from the sunni school of thought  might be not creddiable and based on this belief i am not sure abt some of the sahabas but trust me if it was a poven fact i would have started to compose a poem to curse them with style  

[AMIR33]

On 2/8/2025 at 2:18 PM, Sabrejet said:

Salam brother.

Trying to change Mahdivist's mind is an exercise in futility. IMO it's better that we wait for OP's response before this thread is derailed.

i havent had the displesure of seeing a sahih hadith or even a hassan one that sited the disrespects done by the sahabas in qn to the zahra' SALAAMULAH ALAYHA  

I said displeasure bc it would mean the disrespect was a real event n it would be painfull to me or any one with a spec of honor 

 

[AMIR33]

On 2/8/2025 at 3:47 PM, Abu Hadi said:

What  you have to understand is that ideas and concepts that were embedded into your brain when you first started life, i.e. childhood before maturity, are always going to be there in some form. Your mind holds onto these things because they helped you to survive in the beginning, before you had additional skills (reading skills, mathematical skills, social skills, a social network, etc). That is also why an trauma that happened to you during this time will affect you in some way for the rest of your life. 

Although these things will always be in your brain, you can manage them if you are aware of what is going on. For example, I was raised as a child in the Christian Church. As many people know, music and singing are a big part of Christianity and the Christian Church Service on Sundays. Some Churches use modern music with rock bands, etc, and some (like the one I grew up in) use older style music like Hymns and Choir Music. There is a very good reason why they use music so much. It is because music is one of the only forms of artistic expression that bypass the logical centers of your brain and effect the emotional centers directly. That is why people connect music to emotions directly and that is also why music is used to manipulate people emotionally. That is one of the reasons why many marjaa' say it is haram, because if used by those who have an evil agenda (i.e. most governments in the current world), it can be used to manipulate the masses into going against their own logic and their own interests. 

Anyway, even today, and I have been muslim for over 20 years and I have never been to a Church Service in that time (except for once when I attended the funeral of my grandmother), when I hear those hymns and those songs it still affects me emotionally in a not so good, non rational way. I know which ones they are and that is why I avoid them. 

It is the same thing with the Sahaba as imagined by Sunni thought. The myth that all Sahaba were good and had good intentions is something that is embedded in the followers since childhood. They are told not to say anything bad about any Sahaba and when anything bad is said, it triggers a reflex in their brain that is emotional and not rational. You know this because you studied about the Sahaba objectively, and if you study the subject, objectively you can see that is is very, very implausible and probably impossible that a community as large as the Sahaba (i.e. anyone who had personal contact with Rasoulallah), which probably numbered in the tens of thousands, were all good and perfect and had no hypocrisy or bad intentions for which they would be condemned. It doesn't fit with reality, not just based on hadith, even from Sunni books, but from most people's personal lives.

Most people know or have come in contact with at least a few people who are completely bad and evil. Some unfortunate people come in contact with these kinds of people on a daily basis. So we can't imagine that in the community of Medina, even amoung people who were associated with Rasoulallah, that there wasn't at least a few who fit into this category. There is no ayat in Quran that even hints at this type of immunity and in fact there are several verses in the Holy Quran that explicitly state that there were hypocrites in Medina (hypocrites plural, the Arabic plural meaning more than 2). There are many other facts and this is the rational argument which is rock solid if you actually delve into this subject, which unfortunately most of our Sunni brothers will never delve into in any kind of depth. If they did, they would come to the same conclusion. 

What you have to understand is that this is an emotional reflex and not anything else. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) wishes for us to follow our aql (rationality and intelligence) and let that be the decider between right and wrong and not our emotional reflexes. We can manage our emotional reflexes via our aql (i.e. rational arguments and proofs). This is actually what happens when people talk about going to 'Therapy', i.e. talking therapy. They pinpoint the areas where there emotional reflexes are causing them to act irrationally, i.e. agains their own interests, and they use logical proofs and arguments to manage these reflexes, that is all it is. You can pay a therapist for this or you can do it yourself for free, lol. 

At the same time, we as Shia must be sensitive to the fact that our Sunni brothers and sisters have this reflect and not taunt them or provoke them without a good reason. This is why most marjaa' do not allow cursing of Aisha and Hafsa or the first three Caliphs (Umar, Abu Bakr, Uthman) since these are the ones that are most closely associated with Rasoulallah amoung the Sahaba that are imagined to be good and immune from vice by our brothers and sisters. It is also possible that these personalities did have some good qualities and good actions but we believe (as Shia) that their bad actions were so bad (Aisha launching a war against the Caliph of her time, i.e. Imam Ali((عليه السلام)) out of jelousy and as a result thousands of mumineen were killed, Umar and Abu Bakr doing a political coup to deprive Imam Ali((عليه السلام)) of his right which was ordered by Rasoulallah(i.e. the Caliphate)) that they eclipse completely their good deeds and good qualities. These personalities were not good people, because of those deeds and do not deserve any praise or reverence. 

The actual cursing (la'nat) should only be done as a method of doing Tabara (disassociation) to those who were directly involved in the slaughter and severe oppression of Imams of Ahl Al Bayt((عليه السلام)) and their followers. This includes Muawiya(la), Yazid(la), and others. At the same time, it is not recommended to make a show of this cursing and it is usually only done in situations that are semi-private, i.e. personal dua and gatherings, such as Majalis for Imam Hussein((عليه السلام)), where almost exclusively Shia are present. This is considered having good aklaq, again not to antagonize our brothers and sisters. 

Those who publicly curse the wives of Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) or the three and make up stupid stories about them (like the ones you probably heard) which are not backed by evidence or authentic hadith are agents of the Shayateen and are probably on the CIA/MI6 payroll and we do Tabarra (disassociation) from them as well because their goal is not to do Tabarra from enemies of Ahl Al Bayt((عليه السلام)), but to cause fitna amoung the Muslim Ummah and the only beneficiary of this fitna is the Taghut. 

If you have any other questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact me directly. Salam 

SUBHANALKHALIQ  .... how beautifull ur argument is . may ALLAH grant the ummah more of u .  

talking about yazeed and his beaurocrats that were involved of that painfull blasphemic event i even hate any one who argues on behalf of their iman , may AL-ADL show them why he created yawm al hisab.

i come from the Ash'ari school of thought n i am proud to say we were thought to love the HABIB SAW w all our heart and my qn only arises from a point of '"did those grave mistakes really happen ?" and not i respected so and so all my life n now that i know what he commited how can i hate slash curse him 

because i wont loose a sec of sleep over not respecting a munafiq  coz i learned from my childhood that the state of being a sahabah is a state of honor a person recieves for the blessing of seeing the NOOR AL-HADI (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)  but there is a diffrence between ibn salool (a munafiq) and salmaan RA  

 

[AMIR33]

On 2/8/2025 at 9:21 AM, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam thanks a million for searching for truth however at first definition of Sahaba for Shias is different from definition of sunnis which shia Muslism on't curse Sahaba who are shaba by their definition but on the the other hand curse enemies od Ahlulabyt (عليه السلام) which maybe some of them have been categorized as Sahaba by Sunni definition while Shias have not  recognized them as Sahabs .

Why do Shias curse the Sahabah and khalifahs?

Concise answer

Basically, Shias believe that when it comes to Adalah, the Sahaba are like every other normal person. Just because one has been with the Prophet for a while doesn’t necessarily mean that he is going to always be adel (righteous). Merely being with the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) doesn’t do any good for one’s adalah unless it shows itself in his actions and behavior. Therefore, the criterion for being adel is one’s actions and conduct. If it accords with Islamic standards, that person is adel, and on the contrary if it doesn’t, he isn’t. This criterion corresponds with the Quran and the tradition of the Holy Prophet of Islam (p.b.u.h), and also corresponds with the realities of history. In addition, the historical evidence that we will cite in our detailed answer, also emphasizes on this point.

Detailed Answer

One of the accusations that Shias have always faced from their opposers is that they have a hidden hatred and enmity towards the Prophet’s companions (Sahaba). Yet, a realistic look at the matter, far from any bias, gives us the fact that this is a false accusation.

Detailed Answer.........https://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/en2588

The Concept of Ṣahāba and ʿAdala from a Shia Perspective

https://www.almahdi.edu/sahaba-shia

Chapter Four: Shi’a rejection of the Sahaba

Shia scholar Allamah Sayyid Asad Haider writing on the Shi’a aqeedah on the Sahaba states:

“The Shi’a of the Ahl’ul bayt respect Rasulullah’s Sahaba, they do not play down respect for them, but when following the life of Rasulullah (s) they stress that the Shari’a applies equally to Sahaba and non Sahaba – the Sahaba’s position and status is in accordance with their deeds and actions”.
Taken from al Sahabeeyat fi Nazhar Shi’a page 32, printed in Egypt

https://shiapen.com/blog/chapter-four-shi-a-rejection-of-the-sahaba

by the way i am not struggling with loosing respect or love for muaawiyah .. its the huge ones with the claims of huge misdeeds that i am loosing peace over 

i.e ummar ibn alkhataab ra and what is claimed that he did to the ZAHRA' (عليه السلام) , meaning its about the legitmacy of the sources siting the situation coming from a sunni pov ( no disrespect to the shi'i sources. the ulama' are the pillars of  integrity this ummah stands on )

 

[layman]

Salam,
During the lifetime of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), he participated in many critical battles. One of the most famous was the Battle of Uhud. He instructed the Muslim archers not to leave their position on the hill. However, they disregarded his command due to personal or worldly interests. As a result, the Muslims suffered defeat, and the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was nearly killed.

It is important to remember that all the Muslim fighters in that battle were Sahabah.

Similarly, Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) reminded us of our obligation to hold firmly to the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام). The disunity and difficulties faced by Muslims today stem from neglecting this guidance.
Let us remain steadfast in holding onto the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) and emphasize guiding others to understand their significance. By doing so, Muslims can achieve unity through their commitment to the Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام).

[GEU_40]

I believe that @AMIR33 seems to have sincere intentions.

Guys, try to understand that given the upbringing of most Sunnis, reading certain ahadith, that are authentic even by their strictest standards, is like a gut punch to them. Imagine finding out that you have been lied to your whole life.

Brother, may Allah help you in your quest for research. IMO, you might want to start one by one; each controversial topic requires weeks or even months to properly research, especially if your Arabic is not strong and you don't have access to physical manuscripts.

We are here to help you, Insha'Allah.

Edited February 21 by Sabrejet

[GEU_40]

On 2/15/2025 at 12:02 PM, Guest Awais said:

Ibn Abi al-Hadῑd al-Muʻtazilῑ, a prominent exegete of the compilation, strongly argues that the individual referred to in this sermon

Two questions, Dear Guest. First, have you read Ibn Abi al Hadid's "strong argument"? Secondly, do you know Ibn Abi al Hadid's actual beliefs?

Before copy pasting random stuff, at least try to check and double check whether the arguments are rock solid, otherwise you weaken your case even further.

Edited February 21 by Sabrejet