Ali and Praying under the influence

[Code_Red]

@Das_Reich

yes there is no hate material in classical ahle suunah texts as most imams of ahle sunnah were from schools of iraq , medina pupils of Tabaeen and Sahaba who held Ali in high regard like zayd b arqam,amir b wathila, saeed b jubair , hasan basri etc.

first one to cast doubts about the righteous stance of ALi in the civil war was ibn taymiyah and his syrian school. They relied on lot of fabricated traditions which lower the status of Ali and exaggerates the merits of this syrian enemies specifically muawiyah thats why mostscholars agree that not a single merit of muawiyah is considered authentic .But this belief did not die with muawiyah as late as Imam Nasai there were Nawasibs in syria and that why he wrote a book specifically on merits of ALi.Modern writers taking clues from orientalists have gone one step further like Mahmood Ahmed Abbasi accusing ALi and his supporters of killing uthman and usurping caliphate

the present day shia sunni positions were formulated a hundred or so yrs after the actual events of the civil wars.Before the 4 imams there was also ahle sunnah and shia and their beliefs were somewhat different regarding historical personalities

let me ask u guys this …we all know hajjaj b yusuf killed abdullah b zubair [a sahabi] and crucified his corpse. Yet hajjaj was considered a leader of muslims back then, and religious authorities despite their dislike for him gave him homage now how can this be compatible with the present belief of ahle sunnah ?
Now if u say that all kings who cursed Ali starting from muawiyah were not ahle sunnah but nawasib than I agree with you that ahle sunnah has always honored Ali. But the fact is that following the state authority has been a requirement by consensus of most scholars.

For me Hajaj bin yousef was a butcher, an evil ruler and wrath of Allah on muslims. Discussed him and his ‘innovation’ some years ago here

Now Sunni have a policy of not cursing anyone from Islamic history. Which is excellent policy in principle :k:. because there is chances of error. But this policy had its side effects that scholars and common muslim refrain from criticising historical figures of early days of Islam. Thus they hardly form any negative opinion about anyone. This is partly ok but the dark side is that they dont allow anyone to investigate their negative traits and try to hide them. Which is wrong IMO.

We should call a spade a spade. If Amir Muawiya started that evil practice then he did a terrible thing. There is no excuse that he was a sahabi. Ummeyed rulers were generally bad ruler except few commanders ( Ammad-uddin Muhammad aka Muhammad bin Qasim , Tariq bin zayad etc )

and ofcourse Hazrat Umar bin abdul Aziz (May Allah be pleased with him )