Abu Bakr was made the caliph purely on the grounds of tribal superiority of the Quraysh and other tribal practices like age equals greater authority and so on. The only non-tribal point given at the Saqifa by Umar in the favour of Abu Bakr was his kinship with the Prophet (saww), which of course Bani Hashim had the much greater right to.
DD, I would love to hear out your "rational" solution to the issue of the successorship to the Prophet of Allah, if you do not mind.
I overlooked it earlier so commenting on it now.
When I said that Prophet made Ali everyone's Maula and heir then that's all I said. I am referring to ahadith at the time of Ghadir (for Ali being Maula) and Dhul-Asheera (for Ali being Heir). I did not use the term 'successor'. That's another discussion. You should at least accept direct authentic words of Prophet. That's it. No need to read between the lines. Don't side-track the thread by starting other topics.
My point for bringing those two ahadith in discussion was not to prove Prophet's succession but to say that if tribalism of Banu Hashim is to blame then blame Prophet for giving us ahadith like above about his BROTHER fellow Banu-Hashmiite (tribalism).
The reason I made post no. 11 was your comment "The whole muslim community has been held hostage to fights of arab tribes to monarchy. "
Here you seem to say that all these discussions are political in nature. I said yes they are political but their implications are immense on from where you get religion. And so these political discussions are important.
Do you still have any objection on my post no. 11 for which you made the comment?
I don't really understand what you are tryong to say here. My comment about tribalsim is solely about wars and skirmishes for political leadership, i am not poitning out to anything else. Any issues other than that is a different topic and i can only comment after reading about it.
I think many historians have rightly pointed out that tribalsim was prevealent in arab society at that time. I do not beleive that one has to be a Qureishi to be leader of muslims, that too in my opinion is tribalism.
Abu Bakr was made the caliph purely on the grounds of tribal superiority of the Quraysh and other tribal practices like age equals greater authority and so on. The only non-tribal point given at the Saqifa by Umar in the favour of Abu Bakr was his kinship with the Prophet (saww), which of course Bani Hashim had the much greater right to.
DD, I would love to hear out your "rational" solution to the issue of the successorship to the Prophet of Allah, if you do not mind.
Dude, you cannot have a solution to something that happened 1400 years ago, though some people spend their whole lives mentally in saqifa.
Re: Imam Zainul Abideen's sermon in Syria
Just wana ask a question here ... outa curiosity ..
Any one in favour of Yazid as to what he did or who he was ?
Dude, you cannot have a solution to something that happened 1400 years ago, though some people spend their whole lives mentally in saqifa.
Sir, some of us are "maniac" enough to actually believe in the message of the Prophet (saww), who came 1,400 years ago, and promised to offer us the solution to every issue, big or small, until this world ends.
Re: Imam Zainul Abideen's sermon in Syria
Sir, if you go just think a little beyond the rhetoric that you hear from your moulana/zakir/etc you will realize that Prophet saw did not promise us solution to every problem, Allah has left few things for us to figure out. Now did he tell you which marja-e-taqleed from the 12 you should follow?
Sir, if you go just think a little beyond the rhetoric that you hear from your moulana/zakir/etc you will realize that Prophet saw did not promise us solution to every problem, Allah has left few things for us to figure out. Now did he tell you which marja-e-taqleed from the 12 you should follow?
and this is a response of a man who talks about being rational!
well, thanks for putting at display the sort of "rationality" you had initially referred to, and also your understanding (or the lack of thereof) of the book of Allah (swt) and the mission of his Prophets (pbut). Saves my time. All the best.
Just wana ask a question here ... outa curiosity ..
Any one in favour of Yazid as to what he did or who he was ?
Yazid was a creature most detestable, wretched and God forsaken since birth, his faith had decomposed much before his material being could become non existent..his beastly nature combined by the insecurity he inherited from his forefathers had wished to wipe off our beloved Prophet's progeny by killing Imam Hussain (A.S), his relatives and friends (p.b.u.t) under the most calamitious conditions and torturing the children and women of the Prophet's household just like a child born out of wedlock would do!
But glory be to the Most Exalted, He did not let the sacrifice offered by His beloved Apostle's grandson go in vain. Imam Hussain (A.S)--the Prince of the youths of Heaven- continues to be the King of martyrs and his family the most revered ones; and the accursed Yazid who was destined to be the most hated person in the Islamic world could not acquire what his grandmom Hinda had dreamed of, he lost the battle despite winning it and shall continue to receive curses or la'anat of Allah and all His humble creations till the Day of Resurrection..After which Iblees and his admirers like Yazid would have a blast roasting in Hell till eternity!
I think that was succinct enough to rest your curiosity, eh?
