Re: In defence of Hz Umar (ra) (In response to Pagluu’s Post)
^ I dont want to answer this question as this will open a pandora's box , but let me just say in my opinion there is no comparison between caliphate of uthman and that of sayyidna abu bakr & sayyidna umar
Re: In defence of Hz Umar (ra) (In response to Pagluu’s Post)
^I agree on that with you, but non the less, his Shahadat was "Zulm" and grave calamity.
I also often wonder about one thing, a great statesman like Hz Omer ra, why did he chose to nominate six men to decide about his successorship, rather than one man.
Re: In defence of Hz Umar (ra) (In response to Pagluu’s Post)
^ thats a great question real reason probably he took to the grave with him
probably
1- he wanted to give all clans of quraish a fair chance at leadership
2- he wanted leadership to remain amongst early muhajireen and he warned them not to fight amongst themselves]
3-idea of inherited leadership was abhorent to arabs as he said "someone better than me appointed a successor abu bakr ] but someone better than him [rasolAllah] did not "
4- some of his most trusted comrades had died like abu ubaydah or salim mawla abihudhayfa
Also I would like to add that abu bakr's appointment of Umar was later used as justification by a king to appoint his fasiq son as ruler of muslims.Firstly there is no comparison between this king tulaqa and ibn tulaqa] who had the blood of so many muslims on his hands with al-siddiq? secondly was his son like al-farooq? thirdly bayat of citizens of medina was by then a wellestablished system of election for the 1st ,3rd , 4th and 5th caliph.Fourthly Al-siddiq did not appoint his successor to perpetuate a kingship amongst his lineage.Fifthly its clear from the lifestyle of these caliphs that their motivation was not worldy gain unlike the other case] ....takht par bait kar fakhiri karni har aik kay baas ki baat nahi hai
^I agree on that with you, but non the less, his Shahadat was "Zulm" and grave calamity.
.
this was one of the events in a chain of calamities that had started much before .
this was one of the events in a chain of calamities that had started much before .
Thats right but i always beleive that the love of Uthman ra for Prophet saw and Prophet's love towards Uthman ra is unquestionable, regardless of events that happened during his caliphate, hence i would like to dissoaciate from those he took part in his Shahadat.
Another point that appears from reading about the events is;
Though Hz Umer ra had rightly decided not to distribute the land among those who conquered it, Muhajireen nontheless were appointed as governors in majority of cases (correct me if i am wrong).
Eventually this was one reason why the discord appeared. Many people who took important parts in these disputes are said have been unhappy for not being granted or being removed from governorship.
Similarly state provided allowances depending upon how high a person was valued in eyes of Caliph.
This gives an impression that Arab tribalism was a major factor behind these discords.
[quote]
Thats right but i always beleive that the love of Uthman ra for Prophet saw and Prophet's love towards Uthman ra is unquestionable, regardless of events that happened during his caliphate, hence i would like to dissoaciate from those he took part in his Shahadat
[/quote]
bro i respect ur views without agreeing with them.
Out of respect for bro ibn sadique's thread I will not want to go into this matter further
Another point that appears from reading about the events is;
[quote]
Though Hz Umer ra had rightly decided not to distribute the land among those who conquered it,
[/quote]
land reforms were not completed but warriors were compensated by stipends from bayt ul mal and these tribals were well contented with this settlement.
[quote]
Muhajireen nontheless were appointed as governors in majority of cases (correct me if i am wrong).
[/quote]
correct...mostly early muhajireen of humble origin with whom people were generally well pleased.
[quote]
Eventually this was one reason why the discord appeared. Many people who took important parts in these disputes are said have been unhappy for not being granted or being removed from governorship
[/quote]
yes but they were removed by uthman.But again motivation varied from person to person.Pro-ummayyads like to project it as if all their opponents were jealous of the rise of their clan. That certainly does not expalin the very valid religious reasons why people opposed their rule.Furhtermore not all ummayyads are/were considered evil by the religious lobby we must remember the fifth pious caliph [or sixth if counting Hasan b Ali ] is umar b abdul aziz.
[quote]
Similarly state provided allowances depending upon how high a person was valued in eyes of Caliph
[/quote]
.
correct in umar's time this value was based on early conversion.In abu bakr and Ali's time all were given equal share whether early or late convert.Again this does not mean that umar wanted higher stipends for himself or his family as family/clan of prophet was given the highest stipends.Umar's simplicity is wellknown in all sources but unlike his son he was rigrous in it enforcement as well.
in uthman's time banu ummayyah were given dispropotinally high shares
[quote]
This gives an impression that Arab tribalism was a major factor behind these discords.
[/quote]
it does not explain it fully. As when we look at the tribal affiliation of participants of fitnah they are not divided strictly on tribal lines.Quraishi, Azdi, Tamimi ,Kinda all had participants in both camps.Obviously some tribes tend to be overrepresented in one camp than in other.But given the nature of arab society and their geographical distribution at that time thats hardly surprising.Its also not uncommon to find members of same family in oppositte camps
Afterall some skeptics also doubt why ansar were so eager to accept the Nabi and islam as they claim it was to counter the jews ]
bro i respect ur views without agreeing with them. Out of respect for bro ibn sadique's thread I will not want to go into this matter further .
Brother Das Reich I think the thread has gone it's natural course unless of course those guys answer.
You have my permission to share the knowledge that you have.
The thread was getting repetitive and boring anyway.
Re: In defence of Hz Umar (ra) (In response to Pagluu’s Post)
^ I agree it should be locked , i think nusairee had sufficent time to respond
re: that topic it all boils down to which historical/hadith sources do we trust the most, we both know the same arguments and counterarguments so its best to simply agree to disagree
^ no need to use profanities nusairee , plz list your scholars who were pupils of your imams
you dont need to enlighten us of the high status of martyr muhammad b abu bakr
Amr Ibn Aas not only killed him but put this great man's body in the skin of the donkey (khamar) before setting it on fire (along with many other abuses). Ala Lanatullah ila quom-e-zalimeen.
Please don’t so exited and side track the issue at hand.
Brother** Iconoclast **recommended that you read the book and gave link fro you to purchase it – and I gave you the link to read it for free you saving you a few bucks.
Instead of being grateful you have turned to abuse.
I surprised at you that you have come empty handed – it’s getting rather boring.
We have the following narration from Saheeh Bukhari - But it reinforces our belief.
*Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas: When (the dead body of) 'Umar was put on his deathbed, the people gathered around him and invoked (Allah) and prayed for him before the body was taken away, and I was amongst them. Suddenly I felt somebody taking hold of my shoulder and found out that he was 'Ali bin Abi Talib.
'Ali invoked Allah's Mercy for 'Umar and said, "O 'Umar! You have not left behind you a person whose deeds I like to imitate and meet Allah with more than I like your deeds. By Allah! I always thought that Allah would keep you with your two companions, for very often I used to hear the Prophet saying, 'I, Abu Bakr and 'Umar went (somewhere); I, Abu Bakr and 'Umar entered (somewhere); and I, Abu Bakr and 'Umar went out.*' Saheeh Bukhari Volume:5 Book :57 (Companions of the Prophet)Number :34
This is from same Ibn Abbas (ra) who is pointed out in hadith of pen and paper.
You have run dry and are trying to open other issues – It won’t work.
Just answer the questions asked then we can move forward.
so u tried to save me bucks eh? thats so sweet n considerate of u. I like it and i appreciate it. By the way when did i abuse u?!?
And u tell me that i am trying to open other issues? wow, anyways, ok i will cop that for u too. Happy?
Kher there are plenty of things abt Umer that cud b talked about. And as a 'defender' u have some job to do. And dont say that we have run dry. Brother, trust me, we havent even started yet. Khalifa Umer has masha allah whole sea of virtues we cud discuss. Let me give u an oversight:
This and Insha Allah many more as we go forward.
Yes and you forgot to mention the traditional black turbans which look like as if one has just nicked Lambretta or Vespa Tyres and stuck them on the head.
hehe ahh the good old verpa tyres but seriously brother you have to admit that the Shia ulema and their faces are very nice and full of noor. There is encapsulating aura about them.
I am not sure what could be said of the Saudi/Wahabi mullas. I guess you could see their faces and see for yourself, hehe.
My main rationale behind criticizing Khalifa Umar was because he played the leading hand in a lot of way in issues that have shaped the Muslim ummat for the past and its current state (which is infront of everybody to judge. Its not pretty!).
What kind of nonsensical argument is this? so what you and your fellow brotherns have done to improve the status of the ummah other than slandering the noble sahabas?
Anyways, disagreements aside, i think its time we post in this forum stuff against our real enemies and expose the likes of the Zionists, America, Britain, their proxy Muslim leaders etc who want to destroy our faith completely.
it is not surprising at all, trust me, I don't expect anything less from an enemy of Islam when he is exposed and debunked!
Allah Threatning Umer and Abu Bakar in QURAN
don't smoke nonsense but bring forth your evidences!
HOW could you give high authourity to umer when always ask for help From Imam Alis(as) after Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) death.
where he do not have knowledge how can you fix him for Prophet Hood.
so what if he used ask Ali (May Allah be pleased with him) for help. It only debunks your claim and shows that they loved each other. Even the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) used to consult with his companions (May Allah be pleased with them); what do you have to say about him? Are you going to apply your same nonsensical logic to him as well? The hadith which speaks of 'Umar (May Allah be pleased with him) being the Prophet were the words of the Messenger of Allah (sall-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam); you are only exposing your stupidity by attacking his words.
My dear brother: The above hadith is completly lie: becuase those hadith which condridict Quran and lie
we're still waiting for the ayat of the qur'an which contradicts the hadith.
Then something is amiss here – Imam Jaffar as Sadiq (ra) infallible for you and who has all the knowledge still supports Hz. Umar Al- Khattab (ra)
*Imam Jaffar as Sadiq (ra) expressed his support to Abu Bakr and Umar:
Once wife of Imam Jaffar as Sadiq asked him about Abu Bakr and Umar.
He replied, "I support them”.
Then he said to his wife,” you should support them also."
His wife replied, “So should I say to my creator when I meet Him, that it is your order to support Abu Bakr and Umar.”
The truthful Imam Jaffar replied, ” Yes." - Source: Rawzatul Kafi, vol.8, p.101*
You too should follow the example of your Imam and support Hz. Umar (ra)
But then you know better
Then something is amiss here too – Hz. Ali (ra) infallible for you and who has all the knowledge still married his daughter form Hz. Fatimah (ra), Umm Kulthum to Hz. Umar (ra)
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/5926136-post12.html
Ahlel Bayt Articles A Comprehensive Rebuttal of Answering-Ansar’s Article on Umm Kulthoom’s Nikah
Hz. Ali (ra) would have liked to imitate deeds of Hz. Umar (ra) and meet Allah (swt) with them
*Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas: When (the dead body of) 'Umar was put on his deathbed, the people gathered around him and invoked (Allah) and prayed for him before the body was taken away, and I was amongst them. Suddenly I felt somebody taking hold of my shoulder and found out that he was 'Ali bin Abi Talib.
'Ali invoked Allah’s Mercy for 'Umar and said, "O 'Umar! You have not left behind you a person whose deeds I like to imitate and meet Allah with more than I like your deeds. By Allah! I always thought that Allah would keep you with your two companions, for very often I used to hear the Prophet saying, 'I, Abu Bakr and 'Umar went (somewhere); I, Abu Bakr and 'Umar entered (somewhere); and I, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar went out.’* Saheeh Bukhari Volume:5 Book :57 (Companions of the Prophet)Number :34
I thought u were getting bored with repetitive material and now u r repeating stuff u said before Khalifa Umar marrying Umme Kulsoom and love Abu Bakr etc.
ANd btw, i found the analogy u tried to draw between SHah regime, Maliki govt and SAudi kingdom quite funny. Joke of the year.
Re: In defence of Hz Umar (ra) (In response to Pagluu’s Post)
"Joke of the year."
really?
maybe you forgot to read your previuos statement? lol
Ali (a) acted as an advisor for first two caliphs which saved them from many mistakes. If Ali (a) had not been there, Abu Bakr and Umar wouldn't have got the title of Khulafah Rashideen. Even Umar confessed publicly that "Lawla Ali can halaqa Umar - Had it not been for Ali, Umar would have been destroyed".
But did Imam Ali (a) deemed them as rightly guided khulafa?
The answer is NO!. He infact assessed them both as liars, sinful, treacherous and dishonest. And the irony is that Umar himself acknowledged this to Imam 'Ali (a):
When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said:" I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)." Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah). (Referring to Hadhrat 'Abbas), he said: You demanded your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to 'Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said:" We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity." So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest. And Allah knows that he was true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. When Abu Bakr passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), you thought me to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.
Please remember it is Ali who according to RasulAllah (s)** is with HAQ and HAQ is with him and where he goes HAQ goes with him".**
And, 'Ali is with the truth and the truth is with 'Ali, O Allah turn the truth in whichever direction that he turns"
The selection of Uthman as khalifa also support this view that Ali never acknowledged both Abu Bakr and umar to be rightly guided. The khilafat was given to Uthman instead of Ali because he (a) wanted to follow the seerah of NabiAllah (s) istead of seerah of Shaikhain.
People have every right to defend the status of thier leaders but please do tell us what was that bad or wrong in the practices of Abu Bakr and 'Umar that 'Ali rejected to adhere to it?