Apart from the Prophets (peace be upon them all) no human is infallible.
Shias have inherent hatred for the blessed companions of the Messenger of Allah except for the lucky few that too not for their closeness to the Messenger of Allah but for their closeness to Hz. Ali (ra).
.
brother attitude of imami 12er shias is complicated one , even ammar or sometime miqdad does not make it to the list of those who remained muslim after demise of the Prophet wiely quoted as only 3 according to kulyani atleast].
So I disagree that it was closeness to Ali that determines how imamis think of the sahaba.That might have been true for proto-shia movements or sects but is not true for 12ers. AFAIK there is no one official policy towards sahaba the general consensus being to simply ignore the sahaba generally who are in any case made irrelevant by the presence of imams who accoring to them are infallible
btw are all Prophets infallible ?i dont know just am curious never gave it much thought
and lastly all these events of riddah , first and second civil war have almost nothing to do with the present day 12er shia and sunni conflict.
Re: Khalid bin Waleed controversy [split- Sahaba fan club]
Guys leave all those things i just ask a question from all those persons who are lover of Khalid that what khalid did with Ibn e Nuwaira was Jihaad or just a quarrel.....
Do answer it and let us get a final answer,...........
If you read this link first then the ansar.org site it will make more sense. As the direct refutation provided by that site regarding references is not being address in the pdf or the webpage of the answering site.
Instead of just regurgitating the material that is being refuted explain why that material should be accepted as authentic.
Re: Khalid bin Waleed controversy [split- Sahaba fan club]
Peace All
One way to access whether a person is 'good' or otherwise is to undertake a character profile, throughout the course of someones life.
I am asking for fairly basic information. If Malik Ibn Nuwayrah is a profound sahabi what 'merits' does he have to his name prior to the account that led to his death. Even in that account he rebelled against the established rule, which is never considered an acceptable standpoint.
Re: Khalid bin Waleed controversy [split- Sahaba fan club]
^brother if he was a sahabi that automatically puts him at a higher status than all nonsahabis according to ahle sunnah
does not matter what good is attributed to his name or not ......e.g a badri is superior to a nonbadri even if only badri's name/lineage is known and about the other companion a lot of merits are narrated
so Ka'b b amir khazraji a relatively unknown badri is superior to e.g Abdullah b zubair even though the latter is wellknown but he is not a badri nor did he participate in any ghazwas
personally i agree with you and not with this logic , but we have to apply this principal to other people as well who rebelled agaisnt established rule of Ali b abitalib this time under the excuse of ibn affan's murder
If you read this link first then the ansar.org site it will make more sense. As the direct refutation provided by that site regarding references is not being address in the pdf or the webpage of the answering site.
Instead of just regurgitating the material that is being refuted explain why that material should be accepted as authentic.
i think the basic difference in historical sources shud be kept in mind the historians are mostly weak in hadith so to dismiss saif b umar tamimi or ibn ishaq by ibn hibban and others in hadith is misleading
most hadith critics were poor in history, they are not qualified to comment on them as they have few historical works to their credit.
Thats why I personally like ibn hajar, ibn athir , ibn abd birr as they are historians as well as hadith critics and even this article admit that they have recorded this event none of them can be called shi'i.Ibn Kathir esp can not be accused of shia sympathies.
if u ask me both sides gives half-truths and a interested more in putting a spin on things
here is what i think happened
1-khalid was known to be volatile and trigger happy even before , he killed ibn nuwaira for some petty issue
2-the pious sahaba accompanying him got offended complained to abu bakr
3-abu bakr wisely realizing khalid's military skill was needed at the time and so was the support of meccans difused the situation by giving blood money to ibn nuwaira's brother and tribe
4-umar & other sahaba also seeing the gravity of the situation accepted that agreement for the time being
5-Ali is being dragged unfairly in this whole issue
what i dont understand is abu bakr's paying blood money proves khalid was wrong so why are sunnis bent on defending his wrong actions ?
and protest of other sahaba [esp umar] and silence of Ali prove that this had nothing to with issue of caliphate nor was a political murder so why do shias malign abu bakr with this ?
*i think however khalid shud have been replaced by a general from the ansar , they were the army of Rasolallah and were equally brilliant but were more careful in observing religious obligations and prohibitions *
Re: Khalid bin Waleed controversy [split- Sahaba fan club]
Guys when you are talking about good and bad attributes then gimme one day and lemme compile firstly the BEST attributes of Khalid and then we will check out the attributes of Ibn e Nuwaira.....
Secondly by examining the attributes you wanna say that if Ibn e Nuwaira dont have any attribute then his murder was valid....
Thirdly the major objection is the act Khalid did with the Widow of Ibn e Nuwaira.... what justification can be made about this..... The punishment of such Zina is penalty to death in terms of Sungsaar but even Khalid didnt pay any KAFARA about the act and instead of him HAzrat Abu Bakar paid the Khoon Baha.... Means Khalid was not ashamed of the act while Hazrat Abu Bakar was thinking it right.....
TO Das
Brother i have already stated that this incident was in the earlier days of Khilafat and HAzrat Ali was busy in other matters like, Fidak, Then Firing at the Door of HAzrat Fatima (AS) and then the death of Hazrat Fatima... If he would protest even then was it of any use?
