20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

History testifies that when Hadhrath Muhammad (saaws) declared his Prophethood (saaws), the Quraysh1 subjected the Bani Hashim to a boycott. Hadhrath Abu Talib (as) took the tribe to an area called Shib Abi Talib where they remained for three years, suffering from immense hardship. Where were Hadhrath Abu Bakr and Hadhrath Umar during that period? They were in Makkah so why did they not help the Holy Prophet (saaws)? If they were unable to join the Prophet (saaws) at the Shib Abi Talib is there any evidence that they provided any type of support (food etc), breaching the agreement that the Quraysh boycott all food / business transactions with Bani Hashim?

1. “the Quraysh gathered together to confer and decided to draw up a document in which they undertook not to marry women from Banu Hashim and the Banu al Muttalib, or to give them women in marriage, or to sell anything to them or buy anything from them. They drew up a written contract to that effect and solemnly pledged themselves to observe it. They then hung up the document in the interior of the Ka’bah to make it even more binding upon themselves. When Quraysh did this, the Banu Hashim and the Banu al-Muttalib joined with 'Abu Talib, went with him to his valley and gathered round him there; but 'Abu Lahab 'Abd al Uzza b. 'Abd al-Muttalib left the Banu Hashim and went with the Quraysh supporting them against 'Abu Talib. This state of affairs continued for two or three years, until the two clans were exhausted, since nothing reached any of them except what was sent secretly by those of the Quraysh who wished to maintain relations with them”. (Taken from The History of al-Tabari, Volume 6 page 81 - Muhammad at Mecca, translated by W.Montgommery & M.V. MacDonald).

2. “These days were very hard with them and very often they had to feed on the leaves TALH or plantain” (taken from Siratun Nabi by Shibli Numani Vol 1 p 218, English translation by M. Tayyib Bakhsh Budayuni.

Hadhrath Fatima Zahra (sa) died 6 months after her father (saaws), Hadhrath Abu Bakr died two and a half years later and Hadhrath Umar in 24 Hijri. Despite their later deaths how is it that they attained burial sites next to the Prophet (saaws) and not Hadhrath Fatima (as)? Did she request that she be buried away from her father? If so, why? Or did the Muslims prevent her burial?
(see Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English Vol 5 hadith number 546).

Amongst the companions Hadhrath Abu Bakr is viewed as the most superior on account of his closeness to the Holy Prophet (saaws). If this is indeed the case then why did the Holy Prophet (saaws) not select him to be his brother when he (saaws) divided the companions in to pairs on the Day of Brotherhood? Rather, the Prophet (saaws) chose Hadhrath Ali (as) saying “You are my brother in this world and the next”, so on what basis is Hadhrath Abu Bakr closer?
See The History of the Khalifahs who took the right way, by Jalaladeen Suyuti, English translation by Abdassamad Clarke p177, (Taha publishers)

The books of Ahlul’ Sunnah are replete with traditions narrated by Hadhrath Ayesha, Abu Hurraira and Abdullah Ibne Umar. Their narration’s; far exceed those relayed by Hadhrath Ali (as), Hadhrath Fatima (sa), Hadhrath Hassan (as) and Hadhrath Hussain (as). Why is this the case? When the Prophet (saaws) declared “I am the City of Knowledge and Ali is it’s Gate”, did Hadhrath Ali (as) benefit less from the company of the Prophet (saaws) than these individuals?

If Hadhrath Ali (as) had no differences with the first three Khalifa’s why did he not participate in any battles that took place during their reigns, particularly when Jihad against the Kuffar is deemed a major duty upon the Muslim? If he did not view it as necessary at that time, then why did he during his own Khilafath whilst in his fifties unsheathe his sword and participate in the battles of Jamal, Sifeen and Naharwan?

If (as is the usual allegation) the Shi’as were responsible for killing Imam Hussain (as) then why did the majority Ahlul’Sunnah not come to his aid? After all they were in the majority, there were millions of such individuals, what was their position at that time?

If Hadhrath Umar was correct when he denied the dying request of the Holy Prophet (saaws) on the premise that the ‘Qur’an is sufficient for us’ (Sahih al Bukhari Vol 7 hadith number 573) what will be the reward for accusing the Holy Prophet (saaws) of speaking nonsense?
(See Sahih al-Bukhari Vol 5 number 716)

Allah (swt) sent 124,000 Prophet’s to guide mankind. Is there any proof that on the deaths of any one of these Prophet’s his companions failed to attend his funeral preferring to participate in the selection of his successor? If no such precedent exists then why did the Prophet (saaws)'s companions follow this approach?
“the Sahaba viewed the appointment of the Imam as so important that they preferred it to attending the Prophet’s funeral” - taken from Sharh Fiqa Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 175 (publishers Muhammad Saeed and son, Qur’an Muhall, Karachi).

Of the 124,000 Prophets’ that Allah (swt) sent, what evidence is there that they left everything for their followers as Sadaqah (Charity)? If they did, then why did the Prophet (saaws)'s wives not give all their possessions to the Islamic State? After all, Ahl’ul Sunnah consider the wives to be Ahlul’bayt. Sadaqah is haram on the Ahlul’bayt, this being the case why did they hold on to their possessions?

We read in the Holy Qur’an “And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense shall be hell, he shall abide therein and God’s wrath (Ghazibullaho) shall be on him and his curse (lanato), and is prepared for him a great torment” (Surah Nisa, v 93) History testifies that during the battles of Sifeen and Jamal 70,800 Muslims lost their lives. What is the position of the killers here? Is this verse not applicable to them? If these individuals opposed the Khalifa of the time and were responsible for spreading fitnah (dissension) and murder, what will be their position on the Day of Judgement?

Allah (swt) tells us in the Holy Qur’an “And of the people of Madina are those who are bent on hypocrisy. You know them not, but we know them”. (The Qur’an 9:101). The verse proves the existence of hypocrites during the lifetime of the Prophet (saaws). After the Prophet (saaws)'s death where did they go? Historians record the fact that two groups emerged following the Prophet (saaws)'s demise, Banu Hashim and their supporters, the State and their supporters. Which side did the hypocrites join?

Ahl’ul Sunnah have four principles of law the Qur’an, Sunnah, Ijtihad and Qiyas. Were any of these principles adopted by the parties during their discussions about the Prophet’s successor at the Saqifa?

If rejecting a Rightly Guided Khalifa is tantamount to apostasy and rebelling against any khalifa even Yazid ibn Mu’awiya will lead to such persons being raised as betrayers in the next world; what of those individuals who rebelled and fought the fourth rightly guided Khalifa?
This was the verdict of Abdullah Ibn Umar in his defence of Yazid (See Sahih al Bukhari Arabic - English Volume 9 hadith number 127)

It is a basic principle of rationality that if two parties have a dispute both can be wrong, but both can not be right. Applying this to the battles of Jamal and Sifeen, will both the murderers and the murdered be in heaven, because both were right?

The Holy Prophet (saaws) had said “I swear by the one who controls my life that this man (Ali) and his Shi’a shall secure deliverance on the day of resurrection”. Do any hadith exist in which the Prophet (saaws) had guaranteed paradise for Imams Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi, Hanbal and their followers?
Tafsir Durr al Manthur, by al Hafidh Jalaladeen Suyuti in his commentary of verse 98:7

During her lifetime Hadhrath Ayesha was a severe critic of Hadhrath Uthman, to the point that she advocated his killing. How is it that following his murder, she chose to rebel against Imam Ali (as) on the premise that his killers should be apprehended? Why did she leave Makkah, portray Hadhrath Uthman as a victim and mobilise opposition from Basrah? Was this decision based on her desire to defend Hadhrath Uthman or was it motivated by her animosity towards Hadhrath Ali (as)?
History records that she said the following about Hadhrath Uthman “Kill this old fool (Na’thal), for he is unbeliever”, see History of Ibn Athir, v3, p206, Lisan al-Arab, v14, p141, al-Iqd al-Farid, v4, p290 and Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v16, pp 220-223

If failing to believe in Hadhrath Ayesha is an act of Kufr what opinion should we hold with regards to her killer?
Hadhrath Ayesha was killed by Mu’awiya (Tarikh al Islam, by Najeeb Abadi, Vol 2 p 44)

It is commonly conveyed that the companions were brave, generous, and knowledgeable and spent their time worshipping Allah (swt). If we want to determine their bravery, then let us delve in to history, how many kaffir’s did the prominent companion Hadhrath Umar slay during the battles of Badr, Uhud, Khunduq, Khayber and Hunain? How many polytheists did he kill during his own Khilafath? If we wish to determine who is firm against the unbelievers it cannot be that individual who despite the Prophet (saaws)'s order refused to go the Kaffir’s prior to the treaty of Hudaiybiya on the grounds that he had no support and instead suggested Hadhrath Uthman go on account of his relationship to the Ummaya clan.
Al Faruq by Allamah Shibli Numani, Volume 1 page 66, English translation by Muhammad Saleem, (Ashraf Publishers)

The Saha Sittah has traditions in which the Holy Prophet (saaws) foretold the coming of twelve khalifa’s after him(1). Who are they? We assert that these are the twelve Imams from the Ahlul’bayt. Mulla Ali Qari whilst setting out the Hanafi interpretation of this hadith lists Yazid ibn Mu’awiya as the sixth Khalifa?(2) Was the Holy Prophet (saaws) really referring to such a man? When we also have a hadith that states ‘He who dies without giving bayah to an Imam dies the death of one belonging to the days of jahiliyya’(3) then it is imperative that we identify and determine who these twelve khalifa’s are.
1. “The affairs of the people will continue to be conducted as long as they are governed by 12 men, he then added from Quraish” (taken from Sahih Muslim, hadith number 4483, English translation by Abdul Hamid Siddiqui).
2. Sharh Fiqa Akbar, by Mulla Ali Qari, p 175 (publishers Muhummud Saeed and son, Qur’an Muhall, Karachi).
3. ibid, page 175

Can anyone change Allah (swt) laws? The Qur’an states quite categorically that no one has that right “And it is not for a believing man or woman that they should have any choice in a matter when Allah and his Messenger have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and his Messenger; surely strays off a manifest straying”. With this verse in mind, why did Hadhrath Umar introduce Tarawih prayers in congregation, three divorce utterances in one sitting and the formula ‘Prayer is better than Sleep’ in the Fajr Adhan? What right did he have to substitute Allah (swt)'s orders in favour of his own?
Al Faruq by Allamah Shibli Numani, Volume 2 page 338, English translation by Muhammad Saleem, (Ashraf Publishers)

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

kaleja cha-he-ya dushman say dushmani kay le-ya
jo be-amal hai wo badla kis-se say kiya lay ga

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

almost all questions are answered in muharraam post and a question to shia post... i request you plz. not to waste your time as well as others....

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

your post is just the response of khanbabax post about questions to shia ...nothing informative and new thing you asked.....

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

it's because the whole premise is faulty.. u can't take fairytales and build stories from them and then ask everyone to prove the events told in the fairtales as if they actually happened..

it's all garbage conjured up by Persian conspirators against Islam to malign the noble Islamic personalities.. stay away from it .. stay away from sectarianism.. u'r post will do nothing but further divide.. why not welcome a reconciliation or fight together against the common enemy?

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

healtymind It would have been quite healthy for you if you had just bothered to research this very board. It has answered by a very knowledgeable Iranian brother belonging to a very prominent shia family who said good bye to Shiaism some seven years ago after having done very deep research. He had used to be very active debating with Shias on their boards under the name of ‘Student’.

http://www.paklinks.com/gs/showthread.php?t=84056

As I have some time on hand I have formatted the above for your easy reading.

**Twenty Famous Questions of Shia that “converted a Sunni Scholar!” **

Personally I think one should be very, very naive and hopeless to become a 12er Shia by hearing these questions. The funny thing is that except the question number 20, other questions have nothing to do with 12ers Shia. You can be a Zaidi, Esmayeelee and even a moderate Sunni and raise the same questions.

Problem is that 12er Shia think by proving a fault on (say) Omar, you can prove that there are 12 infallible Imams and the 12th is now in occultation. If the story of the converse of that Sheikh is true I should say that I am happy he never faced one of the Christian missionaries (or have not seen their site where they have done all their efforts to bring doubts in the mind of Muslims) as by the same token he could become a Christian!!!

I see Shia repeating these questions and as no Sunni as far as I know bothers enough to give them answer it seems like Shia really believes that these are really something.

Here are my own responses to these questions. I wrote these just out of my mind as I am (at the moment) not in a situation to give proper references. I am giving these very short replies and God knows that my only intention is to help you understand that things are not that easy that some people thought.

Besmellah:

  1. Answer: Yes there is, read the history in works like Seerah Ibnu Hishaam etc. ,you will see that during the same period Aboobakr who was once a wealthy man ended up with almost no money because of his efforts to help Muslims. Omar was also very active during this period to support Islam. Refer to the records of that period in Sunni books of history.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: No records even from Shia sources implies that people prevent Fatima’s burial near his father. Also there are no records that she had requested to be buried next to his father. Aboobakr and Omar had requested to be buried next to the prophet. That easy.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: There are many records of the prophet praising Aboobakr and calling him his brother( see Sahih Bukhari, vol.5, virtues of Abu Bakr), of course Shia considers all of them to be fabricated!. The fact that he did not choose him as his brother when he divided the companions cannot reduce any thing from Aboobakr. He has his own rank and Ali has his own. Aboobakr was friend of the holy prophet from before his prophet hood until his passing away. This is a fact that even Shia sources confess to. It is also referred to in Quran, the verse of Qar . Also the Prophet choose him to be his fellow companion during migration and he was his partner in the cave.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: The answer is very easy and it shows the ignorance of the designer of the question. Unlike the Shia ahadith, the vast majority of Sunni ahadith are those that the narration goes back to the prophet. It is obvious that Ayesha and Aboohorayrah were adults when they were with the prophet, while Hasanayn were kids. Ebne Omar was older than hasanayn at the time of the prophet so he had more chance as compared to them to narrate from the prophet. Apart from this, the political situations made Hasanayn engaged with many things. Ebne Omar was not like this. Also it’s up to the individuals whether they like to narrate something or not. As for Ali (RA), Omar (RA) and Aboobakr (RA) too have very low number of Ahadith. Does that mean that Bukhari didn’t like them?! Also Fatimatuz Zahra passed away only about three months after the passing away of the prophet, how many ahadith does one expect to be recorded from her in these critical three months? The question actually should be directed to Shia. How many ahadith does Shia have from Hasanayn?

The question and any replies to it has nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: Many Sahabah remained in the city for other purposes, as they were perceived as unique sources of knowledge, do you have any evidence that they all gone except Ali? So would you say that they were all against Omar?! There is in the history that Hassan was participating in the attack on Tabarestan. Also we know that Salman (one of the best followers of Ali according to Shia) got the authority from Omar to rule Fars.

In what basis would you say that giving consultancy and advice to Omar while being against him is fine (as Ali did) but participating in fighting with Koffar and Moshrekin (which Ali endorses in Nahjul Balagha) is not fine for Ali? Read Najhul Balagha and you see that Ali endorses the war. Refer to the 146th ceremony of Nahjul balagha (or one before or after, depending on the edition). It’s a pity that we try to attribute our own hostility and hatred to Ali to prove our points.

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: Look at the situation just now. We all know about Palestine yet we waste our time over the net.

It’s the same for that time. This is while at that time there were no media to let people know what is going on. One cannot cover the grave sin of those so called Shia people who betrayed Hussain, by asking about why others didn’t defend Hussain. Did any Shia defend Zayd ibn Ali when he was left alone against Bani Omayyeh? Of course I agree that it is a disaster and disappointment that the grand son of the holy prophet is being killed this easy and people are remained silent.

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: No one accused the prophet of speaking nonsense. They were saying that the pain of death has overcome the prophet. Unlike Shia, Sunnis do not hold a super human position for the prophet and any one else (refer to the last verse of Sura of Kahf). Just like any human being, it could be possible that a prophet say something unconscious. God has promised to keep Quran safe, but at the same time you can see that the prophet is being corrected in Quran many times.

If you believe that what ever the prophet is saying is correct then how would you justify those numerous verses (read the Shia Tafsir of the first verses of Sura Mojadeleh for instance, where God corrects the wrong fatwa of the prophet).

To make a fuss out of this to accuse people who had given anything for Islam is very stupid. Specially when people who accuse them has done very less for Islam. Remember that the prophet was alive and conscious 3 days after the incident. If it was really necessary to say something he could say at those days. It is very baseless that Shia assumes that the prophet wanted to talk about Ali.

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. please read our article on the pen and paper incident for more information. For more detailed info on this matter click: http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Stu/azarinni/Pen.htm

  1. Answer: Because they were told numerous time by the prophet himself that they shouldn’t stay without a leader. Also the situation is very different. It’s very stupid to ask for evidence like this. Each prophet has passed away in different situations and there were no unique attitude of their followers among them.

The question is: Is there any evidence that there were chain of non-prophet successors from a prophet, all being infallible, all being in the same generation? With no mention of their names in their holy books?

Is there any evidence that one of them goes to occultation for centuries while still being in this world?

**The question and any replies to it has nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: This is again a complete ignorance. You can read in Osoole Kafi the hadith were it says that prophets do not leave any heritage. Imam Khomeini in one of his books of Fiqh endorses the correctness of this hadith. As for the wives of the prophet, you need to read the history to see how the prophet made each one of them a house of her own, it wasn’t a heriatge or a gift. Comparing Fadak (a land captured by Muslims) to the houses of the wives of the prophet is very funny.

As for giving living money to the wives of the prophet, it is very natural thing. They could not be married again and they had no properties, many of them had no proper relatives to rely on. What do you expect them to do for living at that time if you were the Caliph? Begging?!

It is narrated in a hadith (in Bukhari ) to the effect that some of the wives of the prophet went to Ayesha in the time of Omar to encourage her accompany them to Omar’s house to ask for heritage from the prophet, Ayesha rejected and said prophets do not leave any heritage, as the result they also changed their mind.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: It all depends on their intention. Al’Aamalo Bennyat. If their intention was to bring Fitnah among Muslims or to get their own personal benefit then they have done a sin (no matter if they were in Ali’s army or Muawiyah’s army). As for their position in the hereafter, we are not God to judge about it. Read letter 58 (or one before or after depending on the edition) of Najhul Balagha to see what does Imam Ali think about people of Siffin.

Of course I do agree that the right was with Ali (RA) and not Ayesha (RA) or Moawiah. I do agree that Ali (RA) was oppressed in these incidents but I cannot judge about the intentions of every individual who was involved.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: This is very deceiving question. To say that the hypocrites were not among those 4 has nothing to prove against the Sahabah. Read Shia Tafasir to see what the features of these hypocrites were. Even the Shia tafasirs do not consider them among the popular sahabeh of the prophet. The Hypocrites mentioned in the Quran were Abdullah ibn Ubayy and his henchmen.

Ibn Ubayy died during the lifetime of the Prophet and with that the hypocrites too eroded. Their features certainly are not of the features of great Sahabah like Omar ,Aboobakr , Talha and Zobayr. Read your own sources like Al-mizan and you will see.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: A complete confusion. First what the author is TRYING to refer to are principles of Fiqh and not governing a society. And there are more to it like Ijma and also including Ijtihad in the list shows that the author knows nothing about sources of Fiqh in Shia or Sunni discipline. If you read the history of Islam you will see that the holy prophet established a very democratic society in which many of the decisions ( of course except those revealed by God) were made through consulting with experienced people.

What happened in Saqifah was in fact an approach that was established by the holy prophet himself. In this way you might say it was based on Sunnah and ijtehad. On the other hand there are absolutely no clear evidence for the doctrine of having 12 Imams in Quran and Sunnat. So the same question applies to Ithna Ashari themselves.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: I don’t believe that rejecting a Khalifa is tantamount apostasy, however as Ali says in Najhul Balagha, letter 6, the rejecter has gone astray from the way of Muslims. Not all people who fought Ali actually rejected his Caliphate, many started the fight because they wanted to arrest the killers of Uthman (again refer to 58th letter in Nahjul Balagha or one before or after depending on the edition),
    **
    The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  2. Answer: No dear, there is another possibility, both have a portions of right and wrong. As for Jamal and Sifeen, as I said it all goes back to the intentions of individuals. It is possible that some one with divine intention in Muawiyah’s army be considered as martyr and some one with wrong intentions in Ali’s army just wasted his life. By this however I do not mean to justify the Muawiyah’s act of fighting Ali.

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: No and there are also no ahadith to indicate the followers of Imam Sadiq have guaranteed the paradise. So what?! Zaideis are also the followers of Imam Ali, same for Ismailis but they consider you as misguided same as you consider them as misguided, are they all go to paradise according to Ithna Ashari Shia because they are followers of Ali?

**Does following Ali only means to be an Ithna Ashari? **

**Are you 100% sure that Malik Ashtar had the same doctrine of Imamat as Ithna Asharis? **

Can we say that Sunnis are not followers of Ali only because they also respect and follow the other Sahabah? By the way, all the imams you talked about are imams in Fiqh not in Aqeedah. So your comparison is irrelative. Also the hadith (if accepted as authentic) does not imply that these are THE ONLY ones who go to paradise. Do you think there are no other ahadith that indicate the holy prophet promising heaven to any one other than Ali? Have you ever read the verse of Quran that talks in praise of Mohajerin and Ansar and encourages those who follow in their path (Tawbah :100)?

Can an Ithna Ashari Shia consider himself as one of the people who this verse is talking about (one who follows the path of Sahabeh)? In another verse (Hashr :10) Allah says that people who are not among Mohajers and Ansar must pray to Him not to put any ill thought about those Sahabah in their hearts, have you ever prayed and requested this from Allah or are you practicing cursing Sahabah and spreading ill thoughts about them?

Read the fist verses of the Sura of Momenoon to see in general who are the people who go to paradise, can you see any mentions of the followers of certain Imams there?

**The question and any replies to it has nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: The narration that Ayesha was a severe critic of Uthman to such an extent that she stated: “Kill this Nathal because he became a Kaffir” is reported in Sunni works by a person called “Nasr ibn Muhazim”..This person was an extremist Shii and the scholars of rijaal have considered this person to be a liar and a fabricator. So this narration is simply inauthentic.

Can you honestly claim that you know the motivation of your best friend that you have known and see all the time in your life when he/she wants to do anything? How can we talk about the motivation of a woman who was living 1400 years ago with all these conflicting pieces of records from history?

Instead of casting doubt about her motivations, is it not closer to Taqwa if we respect her as the beloved wife of the prophet and as our mother (if we consider ourselves Momin).

Is it not closer to cautious if we observe the verse in Sura of Noor who warns people of thinking ill about Ayesha. Is it not closer to Taqwa to observe the verse that says “avoid uncertain accusations, as most of them are sin”?

  1. Answer: Here the questioner tries to place the impression that Muawiyah killed Ayesha. By referring back to Tarikhul Islam, vol.2 by najeefabadi we found THAT THERE IS NO SUCH NARRATION THAT STATES MUAWIYA KILLED AYESHA. It only says that Ayesha died a natural death and was buried in Janntul Baqiyaah. Now here we can see the dishonesty of the apostate to Shiism as he fabricates lies and uses deception.

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: How many did Salman or AbuDhar kill? How many did Miqdad or Ibn Abbas kill? Daft question! The designer of the question is very much affected by the dictatorship of his country. The prophet did not encourage people to shot up when he asked for something. He used to listen to the second opinions and many times he would accept it. I haven’t read the story that is referred to in the question but to me it makes a perfect sense.

It was the Sunnah of the Arabs to support their relatives. The prophet himself used this Sunnah many times.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shiism is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: The hadith is Hadithe wahid (narrated only by one man), and the narrator was a kid when he was hearing it. No one can base all his religion in a hadithe wahed. Apart from this, the hadith does not put any obligation on Muslims. It is not ordering anything, it is reporting something. Also the hadith refers to these people as Amirs (few versions refer to them as Khalifs), non of the Shia Imams (except Ali and partially Hassan) became an Amir of Khalif.

Moreover Imam Zainul Abideen refused to accept the post of Caliphate when the situation was very favourable. Even Bani Ummayah and the Syrians were ready to give him Baiaah but he simply refused. Likewise Imam Jaffar as Sadiq refused Caliphate in a scenario when the Alwis and Banu Abbas had uprooted Banu Ummayah and a large number of people were willing to give him Baiaah.

Also it is only the Ithna Ashari who believe in the existence of the 12th Imam. According to other Muslims he never existed. Also there are many other ahadith that give different prophecies about the future of Muslims. One should look at them all and examine the narrators to be able to get a better picture.

The hadith does not say that these Amirs themselves are very good Muslims, it says that in their time Islam has power and respect so I can see how Mulla Ali Qari looks at it.

As for the other hadith, you should read the ahadith of the same category to see the whole picture. The hadith as it is written above has not been considered as authentic by Sunnies, However there are ahadith that says who ever get apart from the community of Muslims (to the degree that he even does not know the leader of the society) will be dead like people of ignorant.

This is nothing but the indication of importance of being socially & politically aware and active in Islam. This is very much in line with the 6th letter of Ali to Muawiyah in Najhul Balagha. It in no way indicates that there should always be a qualified Imam of time. It is clear that if there are no qualified Imams then the hadith will not be relevant to the situation any more.

It says that if Muslims have a leader, you as an individual must recognize him; this is your political and social responsibility as a Muslim.

**So please see the correct version of hadith in its context to help yourself understanding it. **

  1. Answer: Imam Khomeini said in one of his speeches that walye faqih can even order muslims to stop reading prayer if he finds that reading the prayers could harm islam. It is amusing to see his followers are now accusing Omar.

As for Omar, he never initiated Tarawih. It was started at the time of the prophet and the prophet let muslims doing it for 3 nights. The only reason that he put a halt in it was (according to the same ahadith that shia uses) that he worried it might become an obligatory task and become difficult for muslims.

At the time of Omar, Islam was well established and the prophet was gone so there was no danger of it becoming obligatory and people liked to read it in Jammaat.

The whole reason of forbidding the act had gone and Muslims knew (according to the hadith) that the act by itself had no problem (otherwise the prophet would mention it. He never said why are you doing innovation). You can see the significance of what Omar did these days when all Muslims do tarawih in Macceh, you can even see the effect on Shia people who desperately and interestedly look at it from their TV or live.

The other issues are the issues of Fiqh and ijtehad. Ali for the first time assigned zakat for donkey in his time because he found that at those days people use to have donkeys (refer to Forooe Kafi, the section on zakat), so is this changing the law or what? .

To me, Omar’s understanding of Islam was much better than Khomeini’s. Despite clear evidences from Sunnah, Khomeini declared chess to be halal, same for music.

In what basis do you give a right of ijtehad to Khomeini who never lived with a prophet and refuse to give the same right to Omar who lived with the best of the prophets?

By the way, Shia is the pioneer of changing the laws of God and bringing innovation to religion. Which one is more innovation? What is referred to in the question or the act of Qame Zani (hitting your head with sword) in Ashoora, adding another shahadat to Azan, making golden thumbs for your Imams and making pilgrimages to them, etc.

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

stories After Stories Mere Bhaiyooo Ankhooon per Aqaiday ke Pati Na bandhoo.Aur Khoolay dil se Quran ko qabool karoo.Tarikh Hamesha Zani hooty hai haqeeqat nahi Zamay main tabdili k sath is main tahrifh hoo jaty hai aur is se Tafarqay k chahmay phooth pertay hai.Shiaoo k apni ek jamaat nahi in main bhi saikroo chahmay nikaltay hai aur yea hi haal suniyoo ka hai.
Iqbal shih kahtay hai
Khud ko Badaltay nahi quran ko badaal daytay hai.
Yea sab log guzar chukay inhoonay jo kia woh in ka amaal daikhain quran is per kia shahdaat day raha ha

(2:141)At any rate, if despite what has been explained to them fully, they remain adamant that their forbears had taught what they believe, this does not change the truth. As stated earlier, their forefathers will answer for their deeds and they will have to answer for theirs.
Barhaal is k bawajood tum is ka israar karty hoo tumharay islaaf aisay nahi thai aisay thai tu is se asaal baat per kia asaar parhta hai woh jaisay bhi thai in k amaal in k sath aur tumhary amaal tumhary liye tum se yea nahi poocha jaye ga tumharay islaaf kis rawaish per chaltay thai aur kaisa kaam karty thi tum se tu yea poocha jaye ga ke tum nay kis kisam k kaam kiye thai
yea hai deen ke asaal jis main kisi jhaagray ke gunjaish nahi
Jahaan Taak tarik ke baat hai sab se zada islam per is hi waja se aitraaz hooty hai aur humhari kutooob e riwayaat is se barhi pari hai is se islaam ke bhut Ghinooni tasveer samnay aty hai aur is ka sara kasoor kutab e riwayaat ka hai.aur jahaan taak tarikh per research ka talooq hai humhari pass koi aisa zariya nahi ke hum in main se kharafaateein khataam kar sakain kion ke yea saab books sunni soonaee baataoon se likhi gaye hai.kisi sabqa tahreeri record kay baghair humhary haan deen k liye kuch kaam nahi hoota Quran per Amaal Na hoonay k brabaar hai lakin Tarikh koo chaatna aur is main se apna mafoom nikaalna humhary Ulmaooo ka shava hai.main app yaqeen dilata hoo agar app tarikh per bhoot zada ghoor karain gaye tu is main sirf ek chiz nazar ayee gaye woh hai israliyaat ka itbah.Maaf ki jiye ga humharay yea dono sector sunni shia is k paairwai kar rahi hai
Innah lilahay wa inna Allahy rajioon.
Kahtay hai Qoomain apnay Amaal se pahchnay Jaaty hai aur hum................................shayaad koi jawaab nahi.
JAhaan taak sahaba ke baat hai Allah nay in ko razi Allah tallah Anha ka certificate dia tha.Agar app quran k is ayaat se inkaar karty hai tu app is baat ko oojaagaar karty hai ke Allah ko Ghaib ka Alim nahi tha nazobillah baad main yea sahabaa Murtid hoo gaye thai.Yaad rakhain yea sahaba k qalil jamaat thi Jin k waja Khatim un nabi muhammad pbuh nay deen ka naafaz kia tha.
App chahay tarikh ka koi gooshowarah lay Ayeen Allah shadaat day chuka in ko Janaat ke
Kahtay hai ke Word of God aur Work of good main koi tazaad nahi lakin kis muslim is baat ko Maantay hai kia yea is qurani shadaat per tu pooray nahi utartay ke yea hi munafqeen hai.ke zabaan se tu kahtay hai k emaan lay ayee baqi app log khud samjh liye ga

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

Very nice posts by pakistaniabroad and ibna sadique

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

yaar imran jaff...quran kai sath hadees bhio to imp. hai...kya khayal hai?

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

Now see yaar wht kind of hadees u accept.Hadees mean a khabar?thts why we hve been divided into sectors.Quran ka paighaam Nooh insani k liye hai.Aur app Quran ko sirf os zamnay taak mahdood nahi kar saktay.Jaisay Jaisay Zamana elim tariqay karta jaye ga Quran is mashray main samoota jaye ga.aur is ka mashrati mafoom aur Ujagar hoo ga shayaad yea hi waja thi k Hazoor nay khud apnay alfaz k kitabaat nahi ke.Aaj quran k tamamm shadatay prove hoo rahi hai.Chhay woh kisi bhi elim se mutaliq hoo Nooh insani k Joomla masail ka haal sirf quran hai.Wahi ka itbah kiye baqair insaan wahaan taak pooch hi nahi sakta jo mooqam e admiyaat hai

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

^ some things wont everr change with time....
u will always prays 5 namazein a day and u will pray them with the same number of rakaat that the Prophet (saw) told u and in the manner that is narrated from him....
and to do that u need hadith....

prayer is the most important pillar of islam hence u always see this example, but there r many many more....

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

agree with armmughal 100%

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

Tau mairai bahi hadees to quran ki tashree hai aur yai bhi insaan kai jumla masail ka hal hai...

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

My salute to the excellent informative post by Ibn Sidique....This shows how sound knowledge he has on the subject and he presented it in a excellent **logical **way..... Mashallah...

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

Ibne sadique...your post is simply excellent but if you split it in a 20 pieces and also include the questions of healthymind above and right below there was an answer then it was more appropriate...however ..still it is simply the best.....

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

Brother **dawa_i_dil **– The credit for the ‘excellent informative post’ goes to my very dear brother and very dear friend. I had made it clear in beginning of my post. He is the very reason that I ‘came’ to this board just to post one of his now very ‘famous’ articles. You can read it on the following thread:

http://www.paklinks.com/gs/showthread.php?t=83916

I omitted the questions to make the post more readable otherwise it would have been too long thus losing the interest of others to read (all of) it.

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

Ok ..i understand...hope you will keep on providing us with such a great knowledgable posts....best regards ...
wasalam.

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

As I have some time on hand I have formatted the above for your easy reading.

**Twenty Famous Questions of Shia that “converted a Sunni Scholar!” **

Personally I think one should be very, very naive and hopeless to become a 12er Shia by hearing these questions. The funny thing is that except the question number 20, other questions have nothing to do with 12ers Shia. You can be a Zaidi, Esmayeelee and even a moderate Sunni and raise the same questions.

Problem is that 12er Shia think by proving a fault on (say) Omar, you can prove that there are 12 infallible Imams and the 12th is now in occultation. If the story of the converse of that Sheikh is true I should say that I am happy he never faced one of the Christian missionaries (or have not seen their site where they have done all their efforts to bring doubts in the mind of Muslims) as by the same token he could become a Christian!!!

I see Shia repeating these questions and as no Sunni as far as I know bothers enough to give them answer it seems like Shia really believes that these are really something.

Here are my own responses to these questions. I wrote these just out of my mind as I am (at the moment) not in a situation to give proper references. I am giving these very short replies and God knows that my only intention is to help you understand that things are not that easy that some people thought.

Besmellah:

  1. Answer: Yes there is, read the history in works like Seerah Ibnu Hishaam etc. ,you will see that during the same period Aboobakr who was once a wealthy man ended up with almost no money because of his efforts to help Muslims. Omar was also very active during this period to support Islam. Refer to the records of that period in Sunni books of history.

Note: you means they were supporting from home, where prophet was in hardships till two years… (very good answer)

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: No records even from Shia sources implies that people prevent Fatima’s burial near his father. Also there are no records that she had requested to be buried next to his father. Aboobakr and Omar had requested to be buried next to the prophet. That easy.

Note: Is every Muslim of world right his will to buried with his family members or the community do it by using a common sense. (here you can feel the hate of prophet family by the community or rulers of time.
Just think: Prophet daughther is died, and rulers and which you claim close friend of prophet, either dont know about her death and burial, becuase Fatima(as) was angry to her due to Fadak.. (Muhammad PBUH) gifted Fadak to his daughter Fatimah ( Qur’anic verse Al-Hashr, 7)

When the forts of Khaibar were conquered, the nobles, landlords, and prominent of Fadak came to the Holy Prophet. Fadak was an area in the valley of the Medina hills. It contained seven villages which extended as far as the sea coast. Many were very fertile and there were oases there. There was a peace treaty with the people stating that half of the whole of Fadak was to be in their possession and the other half would be the property of the Holy Prophet. This fact has been narrated by Yaqut Hamawi, the author of Majimu’l-Buldan in his Futuhu’l-Buldan, vol. VI, p. 343; by Ahmad Bin Yahya Baladhuri Baghdadi (died 279 A.H.) in his Ta’rikh; Ibn Abi’l-Hadid Mu’tazali in his Sharh-e-Nahju’l- Balagha, (printed Egypt), vol. IV, p. 78, quoting from Abu Bakr Ahmad Bin Abdu’l-Aziz Jauhari; by Muhammad Bin Jarir Tabari in his Ta’rikh-e-Kabir, and by many others of your traditionists and historians

When the Holy Prophet returned to Medina, Gabriel revealed the following: “And give to the near of kin his due and (to) the needy and the wayfarer, and do not squander wastefully.” (7:26)
The Holy Prophet pondered the significance of this revelation. Gabriel appeared again and informed him that Allah had decreed: “Let Fadak be given to Fatima.” The Holy Prophet called Fatima and said: “Allah has commanded me to bestow Fadak as a gift to you.” So he immediately gave possession of Fadak to Fatima.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: There are many records of the prophet praising Aboobakr and calling him his brother( see Sahih Bukhari, vol.5, virtues of Abu Bakr), of course Shia considers all of them to be fabricated!. The fact that he did not choose him as his brother when he divided the companions cannot reduce any thing from Aboobakr. He has his own rank and Ali has his own. Aboobakr was friend of the holy prophet from before his prophet hood until his passing away. This is a fact that even Shia sources confess to. It is also referred to in Quran, the verse of Qar . Also the Prophet choose him to be his fellow companion during migration and he was his partner in the cave.

Note: Why in Pakistan There is NISHAN-E- HAIDER… why not Nishan , Abu Bakhar and Nishan Umer, if they were brave then Imam Ali (as).

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: The answer is very easy and it shows the ignorance of the designer of the question. Unlike the Shia ahadith, the vast majority of Sunni ahadith are those that the narration goes back to the prophet. It is obvious that Ayesha and Aboohorayrah were adults when they were with the prophet, while Hasanayn were kids. Ebne Omar was older than hasanayn at the time of the prophet so he had more chance as compared to them to narrate from the prophet. Apart from this, the political situations made Hasanayn engaged with many things. Ebne Omar was not like this. Also it’s up to the individuals whether they like to narrate something or not. As for Ali (RA), Omar (RA) and Aboobakr (RA) too have very low number of Ahadith. Does that mean that Bukhari didn’t like them?! Also Fatimatuz Zahra passed away only about three months after the passing away of the prophet, how many ahadith does one expect to be recorded from her in these critical three months? The question actually should be directed to Shia. How many ahadith does Shia have from Hasanayn?

The question and any replies to it has nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: Many Sahabah remained in the city for other purposes, as they were perceived as unique sources of knowledge, do you have any evidence that they all gone except Ali? So would you say that they were all against Omar?! There is in the history that Hassan was participating in the attack on Tabarestan. Also we know that Salman (one of the best followers of Ali according to Shia) got the authority from Omar to rule Fars.

In what basis would you say that giving consultancy and advice to Omar while being against him is fine (as Ali did) but participating in fighting with Koffar and Moshrekin (which Ali endorses in Nahjul Balagha) is not fine for Ali? Read Najhul Balagha and you see that Ali endorses the war. Refer to the 146th ceremony of Nahjul balagha (or one before or after, depending on the edition). It’s a pity that we try to attribute our own hostility and hatred to Ali to prove our points.

Note: you means the hadith is for all Sahaba, so let me qoute the the great Umer saying which prove that the Hadith of Gate of Knowlege is just for Imam Ali(as)

Hamidi reports in his Jam’-e-Bainu’s-Sahihain that during the caliphate of Umar, five people were arrested on the charge of fornication and brought before Umar. It was proved that the five men had committed fornication with a certain woman. Umar at once ordered them to be stoned to death. At that time Ali entered the mosque and having heard what Umar had ordered said to him: “Here your order is contrary to Allah’s ordinance.”

Umar said: “Ali! Fornication has been proved. Death by stoning is the prescribed punishment for this sin.”

Ali said: “In the matter of fornication, there are different orders in different cases. Accordingly, in the present cases different orders should be passed.”

Umar asked him to detail what the orders of Allah and His Holy Prophet were in those cases, for Umar had heard the Holy Prophet say on a number of occasions: “Ali is the most learned man and the best judge.”

Ali ordered the five men to be brought to him. He ordered the first man to be beheaded. He ordered the second man to be stoned to death. He ordered the third man be given 100 lashes. The fourth man was given 50 lashes. The fifth man was given 25 lashes.

Umar, surprised and puzzled, said: “Abu’l-Hasan, how did you decide these cases in five different ways?”

The Holy Imam said: “The first man was an infidel under the protection of Islam. He committed fornication with a Muslim woman. Since he lost the protection of Islam he was liable to be killed. The second man had a wife, so he was stoned to death. The third man was unmarried; hence, he was ordered to be given 100 lashes. The fourth man was a slave who deserves a sentence half that of a free man, that is, 50 lashes. And the fifth man was an imbecile, so he was given a mild punishment, that is, 25 lashes.”
Then Umar said: “If Ali had not been there, Umar would have been ruined O Abu’l-Hasan,! I hope I am not alive when you are not among us.”

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: Look at the situation just now. We all know about Palestine yet we waste our time over the net.

It’s the same for that time. This is while at that time there were no media to let people know what is going on. One cannot cover the grave sin of those so called Shia people who betrayed Hussain, by asking about why others didn’t defend Hussain. Did any Shia defend Zayd ibn Ali when he was left alone against Bani Omayyeh? Of course I agree that it is a disaster and disappointment that the grand son of the holy prophet is being killed this easy and people are remained silent.

Note: Question is why they did not help Imam Hussain a great grandson of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh)..??

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: No one accused the prophet of speaking nonsense. They were saying that the pain of death has overcome the prophet. Unlike Shia, Sunnis do not hold a super human position for the prophet and any one else (refer to the last verse of Sura of Kahf). Just like any human being, it could be possible that a prophet say something unconscious. God has promised to keep Quran safe, but at the same time you can see that the prophet is being corrected in Quran many times.

If you believe that what ever the prophet is saying is correct then how would you justify those numerous verses (read the Shia Tafsir of the first verses of Sura Mojadeleh for instance, where God corrects the wrong fatwa of the prophet).

To make a fuss out of this to accuse people who had given anything for Islam is very stupid. Specially when people who accuse them has done very less for Islam. Remember that the prophet was alive and conscious 3 days after the incident. If it was really necessary to say something he could say at those days. It is very baseless that Shia assumes that the prophet wanted to talk about Ali.

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. please read our article on the pen and paper incident for more information. For more detailed info on this matter click: http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Stu/azarinni/Pen.htm

Note: What you think about this Quran Verse: “Oh you who believe, fear Allah and believe in his Prophet”.

“Obey Allah and Obey his Prophet and worry, and be warned that the Prophet’s duty is only to deliver the message clearly”

Surah Mujadilah verses 12-13 "Perform Salat (Prayer), give Zakat and Obey Allah and his Prophet

did omer follow this verse..???

  1. Answer: Because they were told numerous time by the prophet himself that they shouldn’t stay without a leader. Also the situation is very different. It’s very stupid to ask for evidence like this. Each prophet has passed away in different situations and there were no unique attitude of their followers among them.

The question is: Is there any evidence that there were chain of non-prophet successors from a prophet, all being infallible, all being in the same generation? With no mention of their names in their holy books?

Is there any evidence that one of them goes to occultation for centuries while still being in this world?

Note: Ask from ur self can you leave ur father or teacher dead body alone for three days in summer. and you go for distribution of lands/power/ and vise versa.

**The question and any replies to it has nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: This is again a complete ignorance. You can read in Osoole Kafi the hadith were it says that prophets do not leave any heritage. Imam Khomeini in one of his books of Fiqh endorses the correctness of this hadith. As for the wives of the prophet, you need to read the history to see how the prophet made each one of them a house of her own, it wasn’t a heriatge or a gift. Comparing Fadak (a land captured by Muslims) to the houses of the wives of the prophet is very funny.

As for giving living money to the wives of the prophet, it is very natural thing. They could not be married again and they had no properties, many of them had no proper relatives to rely on. What do you expect them to do for living at that time if you were the Caliph? Begging?!

It is narrated in a hadith (in Bukhari ) to the effect that some of the wives of the prophet went to Ayesha in the time of Omar to encourage her accompany them to Omar’s house to ask for heritage from the prophet, Ayesha rejected and said prophets do not leave any heritage, as the result they also changed their mind.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: It all depends on their intention. Al’Aamalo Bennyat. If their intention was to bring Fitnah among Muslims or to get their own personal benefit then they have done a sin (no matter if they were in Ali’s army or Muawiyah’s army). As for their position in the hereafter, we are not God to judge about it. Read letter 58 (or one before or after depending on the edition) of Najhul Balagha to see what does Imam Ali think about people of Siffin.

Of course I do agree that the right was with Ali (RA) and not Ayesha (RA) or Moawiah. I do agree that Ali (RA) was oppressed in these incidents but I cannot judge about the intentions of every individual who was involved.

Note: Is it is not anough that when you see right at one side, the other suppose to be wrong .

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that 12ers Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: This is very deceiving question. To say that the hypocrites were not among those 4 has nothing to prove against the Sahabah. Read Shia Tafasir to see what the features of these hypocrites were. Even the Shia tafasirs do not consider them among the popular sahabeh of the prophet. The Hypocrites mentioned in the Quran were Abdullah ibn Ubayy and his henchmen.

Ibn Ubayy died during the lifetime of the Prophet and with that the hypocrites too eroded. Their features certainly are not of the features of great Sahabah like Omar ,Aboobakr , Talha and Zobayr. Read your own sources like Al-mizan and you will see.

Note: read history at first time Abu Sufyan went ot Ali (as) becuase he was aware of his braveness and he said, lets take our swords against the elected caliph, but when he saw that imama Ali (as) do not want any bloodshed and he left the matter for Allah will. The Then Abu Sufyan went thier and joind them till his rest, (is this not hypocracy)

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: A complete confusion. First what the author is TRYING to refer to are principles of Fiqh and not governing a society. And there are more to it like Ijma and also including Ijtihad in the list shows that the author knows nothing about sources of Fiqh in Shia or Sunni discipline. If you read the history of Islam you will see that the holy prophet established a very democratic society in which many of the decisions ( of course except those revealed by God) were made through consulting with experienced people.

What happened in Saqifah was in fact an approach that was established by the holy prophet himself. In this way you might say it was based on Sunnah and ijtehad. On the other hand there are absolutely no clear evidence for the doctrine of having 12 Imams in Quran and Sunnat. So the same question applies to Ithna Ashari themselves.

Note: We believe that as Allah Subhan Wa Taala, has sent his 124 thousands prophets along with the last Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) without any alection or saqifa. similary Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) has left Master after himself to guide the Umma with knowledge and wisdom with a will of Allah. (Man Kuntum Moula pa haza Ali moula)

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: I don’t believe that rejecting a Khalifa is tantamount apostasy, however as Ali says in Najhul Balagha, letter 6, the rejecter has gone astray from the way of Muslims. Not all people who fought Ali actually rejected his Caliphate, many started the fight because they wanted to arrest the killers of Uthman (again refer to 58th letter in Nahjul Balagha or one before or after depending on the edition),

Note: Apply Imam Ali (as) this saying to people in Jamal and safeen, ? and (what you think now)

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: No dear, there is another possibility, both have a portions of right and wrong. As for Jamal and Sifeen, as I said it all goes back to the intentions of individuals. It is possible that some one with divine intention in Muawiyah’s army be considered as martyr and some one with wrong intentions in Ali’s army just wasted his life. By this however I do not mean to justify the Muawiyah’s act of fighting Ali.

Note: Allah says that use you mind , eyes, and yearsto know right before its taken back…

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: No and there are also no ahadith to indicate the followers of Imam Sadiq have guaranteed the paradise. So what?! Zaideis are also the followers of Imam Ali, same for Ismailis but they consider you as misguided same as you consider them as misguided, are they all go to paradise according to Ithna Ashari Shia because they are followers of Ali?

Note:
Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, Imamu’l-Haram Ahmad Makki Shafi’i in Dhakha’iru’l-Uqba, Sheikh Sulayman Balkhi Hanafi in Yanabiu’l-Mawadda, chapter 56, and Muhibu’d-din Tabari in his Riyazu’n-Nazara, vol.II, p.195, quote Mu’awiya as saying: “Whenever Umar Bin Khattab faced a difficult problem, he sought the assistance of Ali.” Abu’l-Hajjaj Balawi in his Alif-Ba, vol.I, p.222, writes that when Mu’awiya heard the news of Ali’s martyrdom, he said: “With the death of Ali, jurisprudence and knowledge have collapsed.”

Thats means following a person who have knowledge is guided and follower of non-knoweldge person will be perished.

**Does following Ali only means to be an Ithna Ashari? **

**Are you 100% sure that Malik Ashtar had the same doctrine of Imamat as Ithna Asharis? **

Can we say that Sunnis are not followers of Ali only because they also respect and follow the other Sahabah? By the way, all the imams you talked about are imams in Fiqh not in Aqeedah. So your comparison is irrelative. Also the hadith (if accepted as authentic) does not imply that these are THE ONLY ones who go to paradise. Do you think there are no other ahadith that indicate the holy prophet promising heaven to any one other than Ali? Have you ever read the verse of Quran that talks in praise of Mohajerin and Ansar and encourages those who follow in their path (Tawbah :100)?

Can an Ithna Ashari Shia consider himself as one of the people who this verse is talking about (one who follows the path of Sahabeh)? In another verse (Hashr :10) Allah says that people who are not among Mohajers and Ansar must pray to Him not to put any ill thought about those Sahabah in their hearts, have you ever prayed and requested this from Allah or are you practicing cursing Sahabah and spreading ill thoughts about them?

Read the fist verses of the Sura of Momenoon to see in general who are the people who go to paradise, can you see any mentions of the followers of certain Imams there?

**The question and any replies to it has nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: The narration that Ayesha was a severe critic of Uthman to such an extent that she stated: “Kill this Nathal because he became a Kaffir” is reported in Sunni works by a person called “Nasr ibn Muhazim”..This person was an extremist Shii and the scholars of rijaal have considered this person to be a liar and a fabricator. So this narration is simply inauthentic.

Can you honestly claim that you know the motivation of your best friend that you have known and see all the time in your life when he/she wants to do anything? How can we talk about the motivation of a woman who was living 1400 years ago with all these conflicting pieces of records from history?

Instead of casting doubt about her motivations, is it not closer to Taqwa if we respect her as the beloved wife of the prophet and as our mother (if we consider ourselves Momin).

Is it not closer to cautious if we observe the verse in Sura of Noor who warns people of thinking ill about Ayesha. Is it not closer to Taqwa to observe the verse that says “avoid uncertain accusations, as most of them are sin”?

Note: here you can see hypocracy of Ummayed who use Aisha(ra) as tool to get power. and when they got it, grandson of Prophet mohamad (pbuh) died in cell and in great hardships. ALLAH SAYS: do not go out of homes,
Did Aisha(ra) followed the verse..

  1. Answer: Here the questioner tries to place the impression that Muawiyah killed Ayesha. By referring back to Tarikhul Islam, vol.2 by najeefabadi we found THAT THERE IS NO SUCH NARRATION THAT STATES MUAWIYA KILLED AYESHA. It only says that Ayesha died a natural death and was buried in Janntul Baqiyaah. Now here we can see the dishonesty of the apostate to Shiism as he fabricates lies and uses deception.

Note: its is true and lets waite for life after death to know that fact, that who had killed wife of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh)..

The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shia is the right version of Islam.

  1. Answer: How many did Salman or AbuDhar kill? How many did Miqdad or Ibn Abbas kill? Daft question! The designer of the question is very much affected by the dictatorship of his country. The prophet did not encourage people to shot up when he asked for something. He used to listen to the second opinions and many times he would accept it. I haven’t read the story that is referred to in the question but to me it makes a perfect sense.

It was the Sunnah of the Arabs to support their relatives. The prophet himself used this Sunnah many times.

Note: they were follower of a brave man, ever only these personalities were in burail of Mohammad (pbuh) to stay till the last time with prophet . this is anough to be a great companion.. they were not happy in Saqifa as others was.

**The question and any replies to it have nothing to do with proving that Ithna Ashari Shiism is the right version of Islam. **

  1. Answer: The hadith is Hadithe wahid (narrated only by one man), and the narrator was a kid when he was hearing it. No one can base all his religion in a hadithe wahed. Apart from this, the hadith does not put any obligation on Muslims. It is not ordering anything, it is reporting something. Also the hadith refers to these people as Amirs (few versions refer to them as Khalifs), non of the Shia Imams (except Ali and partially Hassan) became an Amir of Khalif.

Moreover Imam Zainul Abideen refused to accept the post of Caliphate when the situation was very favourable. Even Bani Ummayah and the Syrians were ready to give him Baiaah but he simply refused. Likewise Imam Jaffar as Sadiq refused Caliphate in a scenario when the Alwis and Banu Abbas had uprooted Banu Ummayah and a large number of people were willing to give him Baiaah.

Also it is only the Ithna Ashari who believe in the existence of the 12th Imam. According to other Muslims he never existed. Also there are many other ahadith that give different prophecies about the future of Muslims. One should look at them all and examine the narrators to be able to get a better picture.

The hadith does not say that these Amirs themselves are very good Muslims, it says that in their time Islam has power and respect so I can see how Mulla Ali Qari looks at it.

As for the other hadith, you should read the ahadith of the same category to see the whole picture. The hadith as it is written above has not been considered as authentic by Sunnies, However there are ahadith that says who ever get apart from the community of Muslims (to the degree that he even does not know the leader of the society) will be dead like people of ignorant.

This is nothing but the indication of importance of being socially & politically aware and active in Islam. This is very much in line with the 6th letter of Ali to Muawiyah in Najhul Balagha. It in no way indicates that there should always be a qualified Imam of time. It is clear that if there are no qualified Imams then the hadith will not be relevant to the situation any more.

It says that if Muslims have a leader, you as an individual must recognize him; this is your political and social responsibility as a Muslim.

Note: he does not refused to be a Imam, he refused to get the power . Cant you diffrentiate a Imamat and khilafat.??

**So please see the correct version of hadith in its context to help yourself understanding it. **

  1. Answer: Imam Khomeini said in one of his speeches that walye faqih can even order muslims to stop reading prayer if he finds that reading the prayers could harm islam. It is amusing to see his followers are now accusing Omar.

As for Omar, he never initiated Tarawih. It was started at the time of the prophet and the prophet let muslims doing it for 3 nights. The only reason that he put a halt in it was (according to the same ahadith that shia uses) that he worried it might become an obligatory task and become difficult for muslims.

At the time of Omar, Islam was well established and the prophet was gone so there was no danger of it becoming obligatory and people liked to read it in Jammaat.

The whole reason of forbidding the act had gone and Muslims knew (according to the hadith) that the act by itself had no problem (otherwise the prophet would mention it. He never said why are you doing innovation). You can see the significance of what Omar did these days when all Muslims do tarawih in Macceh, you can even see the effect on Shia people who desperately and interestedly look at it from their TV or live.

The other issues are the issues of Fiqh and ijtehad. Ali for the first time assigned zakat for donkey in his time because he found that at those days people use to have donkeys (refer to Forooe Kafi, the section on zakat), so is this changing the law or what? .

To me, Omar’s understanding of Islam was much better than Khomeini’s. Despite clear evidences from Sunnah, Khomeini declared chess to be halal, same for music.

In what basis do you give a right of ijtehad to Khomeini who never lived with a prophet and refuse to give the same right to Omar who lived with the best of the prophets?

By the way, Shia is the pioneer of changing the laws of God and bringing innovation to religion. Which one is more innovation? What is referred to in the question or the act of Qame Zani (hitting your head with sword) in Ashoora, adding another shahadat to Azan, making golden thumbs for your Imams and making pilgrimages to them, etc.
[/quote]

Note: it is true that Umer harm Islam with first with laws, second with power, it is the reason that today people hate muslim, other wise, Islam is light, but Umer used his illitrate mind to destroy the Laws which is only allowed by Allah and his messenger and the one with knowledge.

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

How can you say that umar(ra) destroyed the laws whereas there is shaeeh hadees of Bukhari that follow me and my rightly giuded caliphs and in another hadees its period was tols about 30 years (4 + hassan) .......

Broher actually umar(ra) not destroyed the laws ..he destroyed the fire-doms *of persia that is why the ancient persian "historians" filled thier books with *"Dastan-e-Hatam Tai " like stories.....

Re: 20 Question from Ahle Sunnat Brothers

**And Hah...umar(ra) illeterate mind...what a folk...the man who is considered as **imam-ul-fuqha **and saing of great sahabi on which sayings the pillars of **Hanafi fiqah **stands .....abdullah ibn masood(ra) is that if i sit near umar(ra) for a second..i consider it more beneificial than praying alone for 10 years ...and you are saying that about the man whose parallel is never existed in human history...brother ..i have used the word **human **not muslim..mind it..**