3- 99% may be more of muslims accepted Khilafat of Abu Bakr ra.
This is a misstatement.
Hazrat Imam Ali (as) did not give allegience to the caliph. With him remained from the very beginning the most prominent and close companions, like Ammar ibn Yasir, Miqdad bin Aswad, Salman Farsi, Abu Ayub Ansari, Jabir bin Abdullah, Saad b Ubaydah, Banu Hashim the tribe of our Prophet (saww) and more who were all supporters of Hazrat Imam Ali (as).
There are plenty of quotes in various books and reporting of incidents even in your "sahihs" that "sahabas" fought wiht each other and even raised there voices in front of the Prophet (SAW) and questioned his (SAW) fairness in distributing the war booty. If you want I will be very happy to provide quotes.
I was just pointing out to you that you cannot take from a source a tiny part that suits your claim and disregard the rest saying i don't beleive the rest of it, either take the whole thing ro don't take anything at all.
[QUOTE]
yes but they left the funeral and rushed to slug it for khilafat and trust me as per your sahih it was a real slugfest.
Even Umer reminiscing about the event during his khilafat warned against the fitna and suggested that such exercise should never be repeated.
[/QUOTE]
Whether you consider it a good thing to do and quell a looming fitnah or a bad thing, all depends upon one's perception of a the person. Its like the "Aata Gon-di heldi kiyouN ae" sort of thing. If one hates a person one will always see something bad in his/her actions.
I personally (again thats just my personal opinion) give much to the plethora of reports cited in various history boooks that often contradict each other, for they were written hundreds of years later at time when differences were ripe.
[QUOTE]
Please read up on this issue from an honest and open mind, read about teh value of giving an immediate adn timely burial and teh value placed on attending funerals.
The prophet was burried by Ali and the true companions before teh people returned from the khilafat slugfest.
Please do suggest what Ali was doing during this timeframe, if he wasnt burying the prophet or attending the khilafat marathon?
[/QUOTE]
All the sources that i read state that Prophet saw was buried almost a day later and he did not have a funeral in a way that happens these days. His was buried at the same place where he died and people used to enterhis room and offer funeral prayer in groups of tens. I am not exactly sure about what Imam Ali was doing at that time, but, certainly, all sources that i have read are in agreemnet that Prophet saw was buried after the issue of Khilafah was settled in Saqifa.
[QUOTE]
I just dont get the ijma concept. So if 99% of the muslims agreed on something that is against hte word of God and commands of his Messenger (SAW) then just because its 99% of muslims it should be accepted as the right thing.
In the same light, if majority is always right then why isnt democracy part of Islam and why do we say soverignity belongs to Allah?
[/QUOTE]
I am nopt talking about Ijma here, i am merely pointing out that, 99% of people were content to have Abu Bakr as their ruler and remained behind him for the whole period of his rule. I do not know whats the place of democracy in Islam is, but, i hvae not come across any clear system of governance precribed by Islam. Even in times when people of Jafari school were in power they had different systems of rule, like Kingdom in times of Fatimids and Safavids, while democracy in present day Iran.
jin ko quran nay ghalti per daraya kay hum apney rasool (SAW) to tum say achey sathi daingey unko
jo hujoor pbuh ka janaza chor kar hukumat per qabja karney kay liye bhagey they un per
jo hujoor pbuh ki sahabzadi ki virasat per qabzaa ker baithey
jin nay hujoor pbuh ki sahabjadi ka ghar jalaney ki koshish ki
I have come to the conclusion that most common shias are utterly un-educated about Islam and believe in all of the fairy tales told to them in Majalis or Nohas. How exactly do you ignore the views of Hazrat Ali towards the other three Caliphs i sbeyond me? Do you think that you are better men than Ali? If he himself honored these men, why oh why do you disrescpect them. Shame on you and your ilk who engage in such activities.
This is a misstatement.
Hazrat Imam Ali (as) did not give allegience to the caliph. With him remained from the very beginning the most prominent and close companions, like Ammar ibn Yasir, Miqdad bin Aswad, Salman Farsi, Abu Ayub Ansari, Jabir bin Abdullah, Saad b Ubaydah, Banu Hashim the tribe of our Prophet (saww) and more who were all supporters of Hazrat Imam Ali (as).
Its not a misstatement. Do you know how math works? All of these folks very well have been against Hazrat Abu Bakr as caliph (highly doubtful, since you did not cite any sources), the fact remains that they will fall into 1%. Hence the above statement is absolutely correct.
Brother Iconoclast, Sahih Bukhari is NOT hujjat for us. I was just showing the OP how the most authentic book after Quran (for Sunnis) contradict the speech he posted from another (unknown) Sunni book.
As for Ibn Abbas calling Imam Ali (as) sinful, treacherous and liar, well my brother. According to most authentic book after Quran he also deemed Abu Bakr and Umar to be sinful, treacherous and liar in the same tradition. So here goes the Sunni myth of sahaba loving and respecting each other.
They may have had difference of opinion, however, it does not give you or any shia right to condemn or disrespect them. It is a matter that will be settled by Allah.
Ibn Al-Jawzee, the author of the book the speech is taken from, might have written a lot of books but it does not make the speech any authentic. Let’s take a look on some events which took place after the demise of prophet (s).
A small, informal gathering of Muslim notables, which Ali did not attend because he was busy burying Allah’s (swt) Prophet (s), ended up throwing its support behind Abu Bakr as the new leader. Ali protested this arrangement. He and his supporters refused to swear allegiance to Abu Bakr.
Bibi Fatima claimed the land of Fadak. She was asked to produce witnesses. She brought Imam Ali, Hassan and Hussain. Even though Quran testifies the truthfulness of these four personalities their testimony was rejected by Abu Bakr and he issued a ruling that contradicted the Quran on the basis of a tradition no one heard before.
As Fatima was dying, she asked Imam Ali to bury her in secret; she did not want Abu Bakr and Umar at her funeral.
This is a part of her will to Imam Ali:
Then theres a sermon of Imam Ali Known as the Sermon of ash-Shiqshiqiyyah:
Umar, before dying, appointed a six member committee to choose the next caliph. Ali (as) was offered the caliphate on three conditions:
1) That he rule according to the injunctions of the Quran 2) That he follow the sunna of the Prophet(s) and 3) That he follow the sunna of the first two caliphs namely Abu Bakr and Umar
Imam Ali refused to accept condition 3 and the khilafat was handed over to Usman bin Affan. Resulting a disastrous and corrupt rule full of nepotism and favoritism. I leave it to readers to judge the opening thread in light of these few out of many incidents and decide its authenticity.
According to which reliable sources. No I will not accept Shia Scholars books or sayings.
Re: 'Ali's speech upon the death of Abu Bakr (ra)
This is a part of her will to Imam Ali:
Quote:
"I ask you not to let anyone **who did injustice to me** to witness my funeral, for **they certainly are enemies of mine, and the enemy of Allah's Messenger.** Also don't give them the chance to pray over me, nor to any of their followers. Burry me at night when eyes are rested and sight is put to sleep."
Zer01, Where is the source bhaijaan?
Anyways try to use the grey matter Allah (swt) put between your ears before copy n pasting made up stories.
This is rich. Coming from a person who believes in Nohas and all the fairy tales taught at Majalis. Zer01, sharam tum ko magar nahi atti. How come you Shias always gripe about Hazrat Fatima? Do you even know the names of Prophet's other children? You guys are such a hoot. You take it upon yourself to disrespect and dishonor comapnions of the Prophet and dont think twice when calling Hazrat Ali Maula (which in my opinion is Shirk).
Its not a misstatement. Do you know how math works? All of these folks very well have been against Hazrat Abu Bakr as caliph (highly doubtful, since you did not cite any sources), the fact remains that they will fall into 1%. Hence the above statement is absolutely correct.
I am not going to attempt to educate you about a subject that you seem to know very very little about. So my kind and sincere advice for you is, before calling others 'uneducated', please educate yourself about the topic you are jumping into and trying to address everybody like a Macho Man.
Re: 'Ali's speech upon the death of Abu Bakr (ra)
actually u all are arguing about unimportant things which are not the core issue between sunnis and 12ers
yes there was dissent at the election of every caliph except ibn affan ....but has nothing to do with the genesis of 12er imamiyah shiaism and its differences from ahle sunnah
Re: 'Ali's speech upon the death of Abu Bakr (ra)
[QUOTE]
I just dont get the ijma concept. So if 99% of the muslims agreed on something that is against hte word of God and commands of his Messenger (SAW) then just because its 99% of muslims it should be accepted as the right thing.
[/QUOTE]
you are right even if one muslim follows the messanger and all other go astray we have to follow the one who follows the Prophet ...as no one after the prophet came with divine guidence
but thats my argument there is no clear evidence that Prophet left any explicit instructions in the matter of succession.In the absence of this its ijma which decided the fate of leadership.And no one who knows anything about it will claim it was perfectly done but in the circumstances the best possible solution.
This is a misstatement.
Hazrat Imam Ali (as) did not give allegience to the caliph. With him remained from the very beginning the most prominent and close companions, like Ammar ibn Yasir, Miqdad bin Aswad, Salman Farsi, Abu Ayub Ansari, Jabir bin Abdullah, Saad b Ubaydah, Banu Hashim the tribe of our Prophet (saww) and more who were all supporters of Hazrat Imam Ali (as).
actually sa'd b ubaydah radiallahanhu wanted to be caliph himself thats why he and his supporters gathered at the saqifa even before the muhajireen got there ...
there were other supporters of sayyidna Ali, but there arguments for their choice are very different from what 12ers base their claim of succession
Re: 'Ali's speech upon the death of Abu Bakr (ra)
[quote]
yes but they left the funeral and rushed to slug it for khilafat and trust me as per your sahih it was a real slugfest.
Even Umer reminiscing about the event during his khilafat warned against the fitna and suggested that such exercise should never be repeated.
[/quote]
as sayyidna umar knew that people after him esp Quraish will easily get corrupted by coming to power thats why he wanted to keep the caliphate amongst the early muhajireen.
Re: 'Ali's speech upon the death of Abu Bakr (ra)
@Das - and who died and made him the pope....
This is the fundamental point of deviation and Bidah of Ahl-e-Sunnah, where the changed the historic tradition of divine%2
you are right even if one muslim follows the messanger and all other go astray we have to follow the one who follows the Prophet ...as no one after the prophet came with divine guidence but thats my argument there is no clear evidence that Prophet left any explicit instructions in the matter of succession.In the absence of this its ijma which decided the fate of leadership.And no one who knows anything about it will claim it was perfectly done but in the circumstances the best possible solution.
Brother Das Reich, in your opinion what should the Prophet have done to make the succession 'clear'?
@Das - and who died and made him the pope....
This is the fundamental point of deviation and Bidah of Ahl-e-Sunnah, where the changed the historic tradition of divine%2
thats ur i.e 12ers opinion , not that of majority of objective scholars ....
and u shud not be talking of Bidah, the jihalat of ur firqah and their numerous bidahs are quite obvious to all ...
sprinkling spices in the eyes of a poor horse ( who plays zuljanah) would the Prophet had approved of that ?
Brother Das Reich, in your opinion what should the Prophet have done to make the succession 'clear'?
bro it makes sense that he should have appointed a successor but we cant just go by what makes sense .... we also have to examine the events immediatly asfter death of the prophet to see if any evidence of that exists.
The real debate is which sources do we trust and which we dont
Re: 'Ali's speech upon the death of Abu Bakr (ra)
How about if we start by trying to examine the life of the Prophet from Zul Ashira to Ghadeer? we could see what makes sense in the light of Quran.
Do you think Deen of Allah could be perfected and completed without the nomination of something as integral and fundamental as a successor/guardian?
Re: 'Ali's speech upon the death of Abu Bakr (ra)
^ bro thats exactly the kind of retrospective questions with a specific revisionist agaenda which 12er scholars have asked over the generations ....
but to answer this we have to dig deeper into the evolution of shiaism
I suggest that you familiarize yourself with some works of Liyakat Takim a shia scholar and Ismail poonawalla a bohri shia they have both researched the origins and evolution of shiaism.I recommend these 2 as u are more likely to believe their works than those of western orientalist and sunnis which u might dismiss as anti-shia polemics.
How about if we start by trying to examine the life of the Prophet from Zul Ashira to Ghadeer? we could see what makes sense in the light of Quran.
Do you think Deen of Allah could be perfected and completed without the nomination of something as integral and fundamental as a successor/guardian?
it is loaud and clear, read last sermon of holy prophet saw clearly says what ummah will do after him saw, he saw did not nominated any one left such selection on ummah.
and about ghadeer-e-kum it was seprate event, some ppls visited prophet pbuh and complaint about hz. ali ra and prophet pnuh clearify position of hz. ali ra not announced that hz. ali ra will be lead ummah after him saw.
^ bro thats exactly the kind of retrospective questions with a specific revisionist agaenda which 12er scholars have asked over the generations ....
but to answer this we have to dig deeper into the evolution of shiaism I suggest that you familiarize yourself with some works of Liyakat Takim a shia scholar and Ismail poonawalla a bohri shia they have both researched the origins and evolution of shiaism.I recommend these 2 as u are more likely to believe their works than those of western orientalist and sunnis which u might dismiss as anti-shia polemics.
Forget that i am a Shia for a moment. I am a Hindu who has turned Sunni Muslim and asking you to prove to him that Allah and his messenger did not leave a clear system of guidance behind after claiming in the Quran that the deen is perfect.