Re: Caliphate issues
^Wo to apne source ko dhund rahe hain, hum bhi wait kar rahain hain.........................................................
No dear....I don't need to search on internet....that's not my way of gaining knowledge.
Got busy in daily life apart from posting a few in world-affairs.
Re: Caliphate issues
I think he is still finding his refs.
thread was not started by me...it was originally a response to thread starter dawa-i-dil...I think credit to start the thread goes to Mods:)
Re: My eyes are aching.... my legs are shaking.....
Sir, your questions are based on your own assumptions, which is why people here do not even feel like discussing with you. Before you get proper answers I think you need to substantiate how you came to the conclusion:
1 - Abu Bakr RA adoration is a criteria for choosing a caliph.
2 - How age would have been a factor in choosing Islam? The time Abu Bakr RA and Ali RA had been muslims is nearly equal. Then in terms of plain seniority by age, obviously Abu Bakr RA would have had it.
3 - When did Ali RA ever want to be caliph to get denied/refused in the first place.
4 - Yes Caliphate was a immediate issue after the Prophet SAW demise. It got resolved based on the prevailing circumstances.
Keeping religious and spiritual sentiments aside-- I have no intention to make it look like some kind of Shia-Sunni thing...I am not from Islamic religion so no offense here.
Let's first look into first Caliph in Islamic rule after Mohammed.
As Dawa-i-Dil says from spiritual and religious angle Abu- Bakr deserved to be first...I tend to agree now.
having said that......now what about second???...dawa-i-Dil again argues Umar was better suited for second??....Then what about Third....what is the arguement....third was chosen as Othman if I am not wrong...and Ali was sidelined per independent historians and only got his due as 4th caliph.
So history has in front of you....you can acknowldeg it that injustice happened to Ali or balatantly reject it by offerring some spiritual/religious philosophies of dubious hadeeths/histories.
I tend to agree that Abu Bakr being first...and Ali being second....Caliph....what you guyz have to say??
Well, as the poster Mirza Ruswa said in his post....it's not my business to loose sleep over Caliphate of Islam:D ....it's upto you guyzz to agree on Caliphate as per logic and history.
Re: My eyes are aching… my legs are shaking…
I never meant that.
Umar was an invader during his Caliphate period.
George Bush ordered invasion of Iraq during his Presidency and NOT when he was governor of Texas…as simple as that:D .
If you can understand this…all I have to say is that invader is an invader and invasion of Persia is the example hsitorically.
If you will say that Umar invaded Persia because of some perceived threat from last Sassanid ruler…it will be as funny as George Bush still telling the world that Saddam with WMD was a threat to USA 
Re: Caliphate issues
Itne log mujhe wait karte to main aaj tak ek political leader ban jaata.
Not a bad idea my friend....enter in the politics...India needs young, forward and positive thinking people to take politics seriously and sincerely for the well being of Nation. :)
Re: My eyes are aching.... my legs are shaking.....
Keeping religious and spiritual sentiments aside-- I have no intention to make it look like some kind of Shia-Sunni thing...I am not from Islamic religion so no offense here.
Absolutely understand as long as you keep the sensitivities in mind so will I.
Let's first look into first Caliph in Islamic rule after Mohammed.
As Dawa-i-Dil says from spiritual and religious angle Abu- Bakr deserved to be first...I tend to agree now.
First DawaDil ain't no authority and neither am I. And second, the selection of Abu Bakr RA was so spontaneous there was hardly any time given to analyze his merits. So this would be regarded as all after thought. The selection of Abu Bakr in large part was to quickly quell a situation which could have become prone to rebellion and clashes between the Migrants (Muhajireen) and the Helpers (Ansar).
having said that......now what about second???...dawa-i-Dil again argues Umar was better suited for second??....Then what about Third....what is the arguement....third was chosen as Othman if I am not wrong...and Ali was sidelined per independent historians and only got his due as 4th caliph.
Umar RA was nominated as the successor to Abu Bakr RA by Abu Bakr RA himself, and I say nominated. He was not chosen until all people participatants of that meeting agreed to it and Ali RA was one of them. Umar RA was not even present when he was chosen and was called for later on. The succession was actually written down and approved from the people before giving Umar RA allegiance. There were indeed a few objections but they did not stand against the majority opinion.
So history has in front of you....you can acknowldeg it that injustice happened to Ali or balatantly reject it by offerring some spiritual/religious philosophies of dubious hadeeths/histories.
Those who have supported the argument of Ali RA being the legitimate successor of the Prophet SAW only do it based on Caliphate being inheritance whereas the majority says it is open to seletion or election since it is a political office. After the death of the Prophet SAW (as we believe him SAW to be the last) there was no question of prophethood and the divine nature associated with being the leader besides being a prophet.
If you are claiming its injustice you need some arguments for it not just saying history says it because the majority of Islamic history does not say it.
I tend to agree that Abu Bakr being first...and Ali being second....Caliph....what you guyz have to say??
As I said, give the points which make you claim this like Ali RA was a more able administrator, or he was a more spiritual person, or he was nominated by the Prophet SAW or any solid point of argument. You can't discuss this in vague terms. You don't even know anything about our history or these people yet you are shedding judgement and opinions here.
I would like to see your points of argument. Please do not leverage other peoples posts for your advantage.
Re: My eyes are aching… my legs are shaking…
You may hold whatever opinion of Umar RA you want but how is that relevant to him being Caliph instead of Ali RA. That is what I need you to substantiate. About Umar RA rule during his reign you need to respond in the other thread that was related to it.
Your not making sense here, you are trying to say that Umar RA expansion of the Islamic empire was the reason Ali RA did not get the Caliphate after Abu Bakr RA.
Re: My eyes are aching.... my legs are shaking.....
I would like to see your points of argument. Please do not leverage other peoples posts for your advantage
Mohammed didn't specifically mentioned anyone as a leader after his death...that's all I know.
You can consider Abu Bakr and Umar as 1st and 2nd leader in terms of spiritual/administrative qualifications.
Since I have no religious expertise/ resources at hand over the above...I will have to agree with your arguements.
Also I sincerely have no idea, how "democratic" were the election processes thousand years back that too in Arab lands.....(You know the record of Arabs in democracy even in 21st Century....just have a look at Saudi Monarchy in present days.... far from being democratic and Saudi Monarchs keep claiming themselves as "Custodians of Two Mosques".... don't know who elected them)
Anyway...back to topic....do one last favor.....prove that why Othman was given preference over Ali....and this will effectively end the debate from my limited understanding.:)
Re: My eyes are aching.... my legs are shaking.....
You may hold whatever opinion of Umar RA you want but how is that relevant to him being Caliph instead of Ali RA. That is what I need you to substantiate. About Umar RA rule during his reign you need to respond in the other thread that was related to it.
Your not making sense here, you are trying to say that Umar RA expansion of the Islamic empire was the reason Ali RA did not get the Caliphate after Abu Bakr RA.
I thought...that's related....not because of period of his election...but because of "Personality" or his Character.
Since I understand that all Muslims consider Umar and all other Caliphs as great and revered figures...that is why they are putting some respect showing abbreviations like R.A.
So I said....everything is not Kosher about Caliphs...at least Umar's invasion of Persia is one such example which may remind.
I agree he might be a great spiritual/God and Prophet loving individual.
PS: I am off during weekend...so hope you will not take it as "Run away from the debate".:D
You may give your opinions putting some historical facts and this will help everyones knowledge.
Re: My eyes are aching.... my legs are shaking.....
Mohammed didn't specifically mentioned anyone as a leader after his death...that's all I know.
You can consider Abu Bakr and Umar as 1st and 2nd leader in terms of spiritual/administrative qualifications. Since I have no religious expertise/ resources at hand over the above...I will have to agree with your arguements.
Correct, at the time of choosing the third Caliph there were both precedents i.e. nominating a successor and not nominating one.
Also I sincerely have no idea, how "democratic" were the election processes thousand years back that too in Arab lands.....(You know the record of Arabs in democracy even in 21st Century....just have a look at Saudi Monarchy in present days.... far from being democratic and Saudi Monarchs keep claiming themselves as "Custodians of Two Mosques".... don't know who elected them)
Would be unfair to compare apples to oranges.
Anyway...back to topic....do one last favor.....prove that why Othman was given preference over Ali....and this will effectively end the debate from my limited understanding.:)
Since Umar RA never nominated a successor he had appointed a committee consisting of these sixe people to choose among themselves the third Caliph i.e. Ali b Abu Talib, Uthman b Affan, Abdur Rahman b Auf, Saad b Abi Waqas, Zubair b Awwam and Talha b Ubaidullah. The committees task was to select the caliph from among themselves. Talha never could become part of its proceedings since he was out of Madina at the time.
In short, this committee had differences and could not reach a conclusion. Abdur Rahman withdrew from the committee leaving the four to decide upon the caliphs fate. Since he had withdrew he was given the opportunity to choose from among them since they still could not make any headway on the issue. What he asked each one of them in private interviews was "If you are not chosen the calihp then whom would you choose?". The common answers to come from the committee members were Ali RA or Uthman RA, with votes in favor of Uthman RA. Even after this Abdur Rahman RA discussed the matter with senior people and the majority opinion is said to be in favor of Uthman. After all these deliberations Uthman RA was chosen. It is said though that Ali RA was not satisfied however it is also said that besides majority vote being for Uthman his seniority in age also gave him slight preference when discussed with other senior people when the choices were narrowed down to the two. This was in respect of Arab traditions for respect to elders. Ali RA however did give allegiance to Uthman RA.
There are other details but this is the common theme of it. There will definitely be contrary historical accounts of this if taken from Shia Islamic history.
Re: My eyes are aching.... my legs are shaking.....
I thought...that's related....not because of period of his election...but because of "Personality" or his Character.
Since I understand that all Muslims consider Umar and all other Caliphs as great and revered figures...that is why they are putting some respect showing abbreviations like R.A.
So I said....everything is not Kosher about Caliphs...at least Umar's invasion of Persia is one such example which may remind.
I agree he might be a great spiritual/God and Prophet loving individual.
PS: I am off during weekend...so hope you will not take it as "Run away from the debate".:D
You may give your opinions putting some historical facts and this will help everyones knowledge.
Still can't see the connection unless you state it in a reason. Umar RA is no God (Aaudhubillah) and you will never hear this from a muslim either. I would also encourage you to not repeat it either.
Still stuck on Persia are we and making generalizations. If you want to discuss we can go to the thread which is left hanging but not this one as the two are un-related.
Re: Caliphate issues
Re: Caliphate issues
These kind of power wasnt given to Abu bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Bilal, Abdullaah ibn UMar, Hassain, Hussain, Abdullaah ibn Abbas, Jabir ibn Abdullaah, Ayesha, Abu said al khudri, abdul rahaman ibn awf, saad ibn waqqas, jaffer ibn abu talib, zaid ibn haritha, amr ibn yasir, abu dhair, abu huraira, khalid bin waleed,etc... and someone else gets this kind of status and check out the statement in the whole world on the face of earth.
Dawa i dil i respect you a lot, please for heavens sake for the sake of Allaah, think rationally from the Quran and the Sunnah before passing such statements.
sir..with due respect..with due respect...so now you are neglecting the status of Shah Waliullah ..of your own land ..India...that he is saying false...i am amazed.....
the whole pakistan..india..bangladesh and afghanistan will be in shirk ...hindu-muslim blend...of ancients hindu ritulals if there was no this man and his sons .....
what he did biliions of muslims...what he did for safing india into Marhatta **state by inviting **Ahmed Shah Abdali ...etc.....billions of muslims bow thier heads when the name of Shah Waliullah comes....and you are saying...he was not even worthy to consider to quote.....
you negate the poers of sufias....
you negate the karamat of sufia
you negate that we all are muslims because of them in subcontinent...
i am sorry to say..if scholars of Saudia ..means wahabi scholars have not given such ranks by Allah to ask the hadees direct from prophet(pbuh) about any matter .......then its not means that these things not really exist....
if some blinds say ..i cannot see anything..he is right
similarly...
if some person is not given such rank...he will say..this thing not exist...then he is also right .....
plz..i am not saying this to you..i am talking in general.....
and you are saying that thsese powers are not given to sahabas.....
if all the greatest sufias of 1400 years combine...thety are not even equal to footlevel of the lowest sahabi of prophet(pbuh) !!!!!
it is the very famous incident that in year of draught in umar period...one man came to prophet(pbuh) grave and complained about it...prophet(pbuh) replied that go to umar and ask him to offer pray ...so he did the same as commanded by prophet(pbuh).....
have you not heard the hadees that the darvesh of my ummah are like the prophets of Bani Israel.....
there are hundreds of karamats of umar..ali...abu bakr...and other great sahabas....
but let me remind..each and everything is done by Allah...only means ..are different...sometimes sufi..sometimes khizar..sometimes Allah himself do etc etc....which are known as "Takveeni Umoor"......
we are muslims because the sufia of india made our forefatheers as muslims...and to the qiyammat...our tongues will praises them..and our hearts will fill with thier respect .....
Re: Caliphate issues
i think...we should start the new thread of Shah Waliullah...then all people know...what a man he was...and what is his rank...and what are his virtues and merits.....!!!!!!!
Re: Caliphate issues
i think...we should start the new thread of Shah Waliullah...then all people know...what a man he was...and what is his rank...and what are his virtues and merits.....!!!!!!!
Have you read Hujjat Allah al-Baligha by Hazrat Shah Sahab?
Re: Caliphate issues
no..but i have heard that its the master piece of shah waliullah....have you read it..if yes plz..inform us..whats the status of shah waliullah and this book...thankyou....
Re: Caliphate issues
I just recently bought this book, 500 pages long and this book is hard to understand without a teacher:bummer: , very advanced. In that book he touches almost every single topic out there.
Re: Caliphate issues
^^ yes...with a man of such calibre...definitely...its hard to understand this book...but do you post some material about the greatness of this man...so that ourr respectable readers doubt will vanish about him...thankyou...
Re: Caliphate issues
^dawa-i-dil what is a batini faiz?
Re: Caliphate issues
what a joke of a question by an uniformed kaafir… 
i suggest u learn more about all the four caliphs before wasting yours and others’ time on such pointless questions…