Hope you’ll find the answer to your questions in this link…what islam was after the death of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
http://al-islam.org/nahjul/5.htm
http://al-islam.org/nahjul/66.htm
I found a good link to the conflict:
http://195.37.93.199/Dietrich/Sectarianism.pdf
Interestingly, there was only a single case of killing between 1977 to 1987 and thousands - numbering close to a decent sized US city in the midwest fron then. Talking to one of Islamic scholars in 1998 when I visited home, Lahore, he suggested that Pakistan be divided into a Sunni country and a Shia country. I don’t know where we are going to end the whole conflict, but already we have given root to another two-nation theory within a country which already gave two nations !
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mufakkar: *
I for one am sick and tired of all this nonsense and I extend my hand in friendship as a Muslim to you all while saying to me my own beliefs and to your own, you can either join me and show the few bigots here that they are outnumbered or you all can stay silent and let this thread be locked up for excessive hatred and cower in fear and lament at the "poor condition" of Muslims that the very silent majority seems un willing or strangely unable to face.
[/QUOTE]
Mufakkar
great words, there is no other solutiuon to this. We all have to treat each other with friendship and with respect, and unanimously condemn and work against this mindless violence, no matter "adherents" of which sect do it. There can be no justifications, no excuses, and no blinders on.
[quote]
Another bunch of lame accusations to ignore the questions raised to justify their fatwah to kill shia's...
[/quote]
I never said Shias should be killed. Shias can be Shias if they want and can carry on believing Ali had the right to be the first ruler and what ever else and no body is asking them to love our Sahaabah because in Islam there is freedom of religion. But those who openly commit blasphemy by slandering the Muslim wives, fathers in law and the closest companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) should be tried in an Islamic court and given the punishment they deserve. And like I said before every Tom, Dick does not have the right to punish them.
[quote]
Its not only shia's who are the victims of some extermist sunni muslims infact terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda is also operated by them... and shias are no where to be found affiliated with such organizations.
[/quote]
To hell with Al-Qaeda and their likes, they are far from being true Muslims because they murder innocent people. And Sunnis are also the victims of Shia aggression in Iran but because Shias are a smaller sect, there for they murder less and their actions don’t get any publicity on Irani media.
[quote]
If a person doesn’t respect some of the sahabas because they disobeyed Prophet for greed of wealth and placed their life more importance then his and ran away leaving Prophet P.B.U.H. and then on greed for khilafat leave the funeral services of Prophet Mohamamd P.B.U.H
[/quote]
The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not have a Janazah, he did however have funeral prayers in small groups without a leader and Abu Bakr and Umar were present. When they entered the room was almost full, they prayed with the Muslims and after the prayers were finished Abu Bakr prayed loudly “Peace, Mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you, O Prophet of Allah. We witness that the Prophet of Allah and His apostle conveyed the message entrusted to him by his Lord and that he exerted himself and fought in His cause until Allah gave victory to His religion. We equally witness that the Prophet of Allah and His apostle fully performed his promise and that he commanded us to worship none but Allah alone who has no associates." At the end of each phrase the Muslims responded together with "Ameen, Ameen." Then the men left and the women and children took a last look at their beloved Rasulullah (peace be upon him).
The companions did not however attend the burial procedure of the Prophet (peace be upon him) because the Prophet (peace be upon him) died in Aisha’s room and that’s where he was buried based on a hadith narrated by Abu Bakr in which the Prophet said “Every prophet who died, was buried in the exact spot where he died.” the room was not big enough to hold all of his companions so only his close family members were present at the time of his burial.
And the reason why the companions wanted the Caliphate matter sorted as soon as the Prophet (peace be upon him) had died was not out of greed BUT because the Prophet (peace be upon him) had directed them to live in an organized community, under one leadership. Therefore, they felt obliged as soon as they came to know of the Prophet’s death to choose a successor otherwise there could have been lawlessness and havoc. The Companions did not fight for the Caliphate. Instead, they shared their thoughts, debated, used the most eloquent arguments, and finally reached a consensus on what was best for the Ummah. The role of caliphate is a great burden and responsibility, not a mere honour or opportunity for exploitations.
Who were you calling greedy? The same Abu Bakr who gave up his trade so that he can serve the Muslim community? The Abu Bakr who practised so much self-denial as a Caliph that when his wife said to him “I want to make a sweet dish but we don’t have enough money, if you permit I will save something from our daily allowance which will someday make enough for a sweet dish” to which he said “yes” and when a little money was saved in many days she brought it to him and he said “It seems that we have received so much over and above our needs” and he deposited that money back to the Bait-ul-Maal and got his allowance cut down by the amount saved by his wife.
And the same Umar who even as Caliph of the Muslims apologised to the congregation for being late to lead the Friday prayers because he only had one pair of clothes (even that with patches) which he was washing. The same Umar who got angry when Usman, Ali, Zubair and Talhah proposed that Umar’s daily allowance from the Bait-ul-Maal should be increased?
[quote]
and then takes away the wirsa of Bibi Fatima Zehara S.A. which she inherited from Prophet Mohammad…
[/quote]
The difference between Fatima and Abu Bakr on this issue was an acceptable and understandable difference, both of them had based their opinions on evidence from the Quran and Sunnah. Abu Bakr’s opinion was based on the Prophet (peace be upon him)’s sayings that “We do not leave behind inheritance what we leave behind is charity” and “We the Prophets do not leave behind heirs”. You can’t condemn Abu Bakr for acting upon an authentic saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him) . This hadith has basis in Sunni and Shia Ahadith books. Fatima was displeased with Abu Bakr because she viewed the issue in the general scope of verse 4:11 of the holy Quran.
[quote]
A lady who disobeys Quran, which asks her to stay at home ayat 33:33, and she came to battle against Maula Ali.
[/quote]
All of the noble Companions and Umm ul Momineen deserve our utmost respect, and are absolutely trustworthy. As for the discord, which occurred among them, it was the consequence of the sincere exercise of personal conviction and opinion. The discord was resolved and is a thing of the past. The Companions and Umm ul Momineen are those whom Allah has described in the best of terms; He has praised them upon many occasions.
[quote]
"When they meet those who believe, they say: We Believe;' but We are really
when they are alone with their evil ones, they say:
with you, we (were) only jesting [2:14]."
and which people is quran referring too....??????
[/quote]
This verse does not refer to the noble Companions, which we respect, it refers to other hypocrites at the time of the Prophet.
[quote]
My friend may be you should look at this website
[/quote]
I only come on the Internet for a limited time, I do not have time to visit your sites, what ever you have to say, say it here.
[Quote]
how dare they hurt Bibi Fatima
[/quote]
Lies made up by the Shias. Umar did not beat Fatima or kill her unborn child, she was his mother in law and neither did he or Abu Bakr threaten to burn her house these are lies made up by Shias. Suppose they had committed this heinous crime, would Ali stand by and watch? Hell no! Even someone with the least amount of manhood in him wouldn’t tolerate behaviour like this towards his family and this was Ali the Lion of Allah.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam: *
I never said Shias should be killed. Shias can be Shias if they want and can carry on believing Ali had the right to be the first ruler and what ever else and no body is asking them to love our Sahaabah because in Islam there is freedom of religion. But those who openly commit blasphemy by slandering the Muslim wives, fathers in law and the closest companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) should be tried in an Islamic court and given the punishment they deserve. And like I said before every Tom, Dick does not have the right to punish them.
[/QUOTE]
and as usualll... Saif ul Islam beated around the bushes to ignore that was raised by me not one or several times..... Hope fully your eye might catch it this time...... rather then spreading anti shia propoganda.
**
Hazrat Abu Talib who has the honor of raising Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. Hazrat Abu Talib, whose house has the honour that first dawaat - e- Islam was held at not in Qaba but at the house of Hazrat Abu Talib even though Qaba was in Mecca too...
Why to sunnis if someone insults companions diserves a puinsihment and a person who Nauzubillah calls a Mohsin -e- Islam Kafir doesnt diserve punsihment.......**
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam: *
And the reason why the companions wanted the Caliphate matter sorted as soon as the Prophet (peace be upon him) had died was not out of greed BUT because the Prophet (peace be upon him) had directed them to live in an organized community, under one leadership. Therefore, they felt obliged as soon as they came to know of the Prophet’s death to choose a successor otherwise there could have been lawlessness and havoc. The Companions did not fight for the Caliphate. Instead, they shared their thoughts, debated, used the most eloquent arguments, and finally reached a consensus on what was best for the Ummah. The role of caliphate is a great burden and responsibility, not a mere honour or opportunity for exploitations.
[/QUOTE]
Oh please come up with a better excuse then this lame one... They didnt even wait for Maula Ali, who was performing the funeral services.
and what is this incident referring to then...
Oh I am sorry you have another lame excuse ready for it... Time... Mr Saif Ul Islam have time to spread all the anti shia propoganda but dont have time to sit and read truth but oh well no justifcation, no time... similar trend followed by some extermist mullah can't defend your believes just call them kafir and kill them.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam: *
To hell with Al-Qaeda and their likes, they are far from being true Muslims because they murder innocent people. And Sunnis are also the victims of Shia aggression in Iran but because Shias are a smaller sect, there for they murder less and their actions don’t get any publicity on Irani media..
[/QUOTE]
Oh Al-Qaeda is known to spread terrorist not to shias but whole world.
but oh whats the best excuse Saif ul Islam have for that... shia's kill sunnis too in Iran but it don't get published and he wants us to take his word for it.... because things never made to the media.... and whats your source for knowledge I hope you dont claim to get wahi's about it now do you. Tell me how many sunni mosques you know who were the attack of any shia led terrorism and how many of them in shia's in Palistan....
but thats a nice but dumb logic you came up with
"Shias are smaller sect, there fore they murder less and their actions don't get any publicity in Irani media......"
what on earth are you talking about shias are not in minority in Iran to start with... but think about this way... even though shias are a minority they are murdered in such big numbers that compare to sunnis you will get to hear a lot about shia mosques attack in Pakistan....
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam: *
Who were you calling greedy?
[/QUOTE]
*Do you deny the fact that some of Holy Prophet companions disobyed him in the battle of Ohad and ran after maal-e-ganeemat, do you deny the fact Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. gave Bag-e-Fidaq to bibi Fatima Zehra S.A. and Abu Bakr took it back and presented a hadith whereas Bibi quouted ayats from quran. on nabi and their wirsa...do you deny the fact Abu Bakr didnt gave back fidaq to Bibi Fatima for whose purity is mentioned in Quran... Doesnt it full fill your definition of murtad????
who do you call was right... Abu Bakr who presented the hadith or Bibi Fatima Zehra SA whose purity is mentioned in Quran?
*
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam: *
All of the noble Companions and Umm ul Momineen deserve our utmost respect, and are absolutely trustworthy. As for the discord, which occurred among them, it was the consequence of the sincere exercise of personal conviction and opinion. The discord was resolved and is a thing of the past. The Companions and Umm ul Momineen are those whom Allah has described in the best of terms; He has praised them upon many occasions.
[/QUOTE]
Doesnt Answer my question... sounds like just a lame argument to ignore the question raised earlier... Let me qoute you the question...hope it gets in your ignorant mind this time...based on the view of sunni scholars..... Lemme quote your view again
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam:
according to the consensus of the scholars anyone who rejects a Quranic verse is a Murtad and you know what the punsihment for apostasy is...
[/QUOTE]
and here is the question I asked not one but several times.......
**Quoting the scholars view on the quran, I raised a question earlier but you were so busy spreading false anti shia propoganda that you over looked it Let me ask you again, I am not a mulalh and I am here to learn... may be you can enlighten us since you are one heck of a extermist mullah.
So based in your definition Ayesha disobeying Quran who asks her to stay in her house in the verse 33:33 and she came to battle against Maula Ali was a Murtad.....
Its the sunni scholars who declares such people murtad don't they, thats why i need their feedback on this issue.... Bahi sahab...being a Prophets wife doesnt allow you to disobey quran, Prophet looth wife disobeyed him too and ended up in the ahzaab**
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam:
This verse does not refer to the noble Companions, which we respect, it refers to other hypocrites at the time of the Prophet.
[/QUOTE]
Let me quote you what you asked earlier to spread some anti shia propoganda.....
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam:
If the disciples of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) were really hypocrites then why didn’t Allah tell his Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) so that he can warn his followers against them?
[/QUOTE]
now let me qoute you my reply
**"When they meet those who believe, they say: We Believe;' but We are really
when they are alone with their evil ones, they say:
with you, we (were) only jesting [2:14]."
and which people is quran referring too....??????
or should I say nauzubillah according to your theory if someone insults sahbas should be punsihed... Now what punishment is your so called version of Islam gonna give to Quran?????
but again... let me quote what you said.
quote:
Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam:
according to the consensus of the scholars anyone who rejects a Quranic verse is a Murtad and you know what the punsihment for apostasy is...
so believing all shabas are pious makes one murtad right? or should I say you are rejecting this verse of quran. **
Mullah jee how many faces do you have... I am glad atleast now you agree some of the Holy Prophet Companions were hypocrites... and i guess I have posted a few of them... but now you changed your view by sayings those are some hypocrites and so called noble sahabas... I have my reasons to believe just a fellow muslim( not a scholar or mullah) and you have yours and let Allah be the judge... Killing shias is not the answer... Let Allah be the judge of us all.
talking about the ayats this other ayat you qouted.. I am still waiting on your feed back on it.
**
quote:
Originally posted by Saif-ul-Islam:
"When you were propagating it (the slander) with your tongues, and uttering with your mouths that whereof you had no knowledge, you counted it a little thing, while with Allah it was very great." (The holy Quran 24:15)
and where in the name Ayesha mentioned here?
**
Fellow muslims and Saif bahi... its the time where the word terrorist is labeled with muslims... People have a terrorist kind of stereotype about us all....... Calling shia's as terrorist without any references doesnt justify sunni terrorism or vice versa...who so ever is involved in such activities should realize thats not true islam...there is no forcination in islam, Islam is not a religon spread at point of sword... I would quote the incident again as an example I have quoted several times now.
A lady harassed Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. by throwing stones at him... .and Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. didn't order to kill her, but one day she didnt throw stones on him and when inquired he found out that she was ill and Prophet went to see her and she was so touched my this act of his and embraced Islam....... Killing each other doesnt reflect the teachings of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
[quote]
Hazrat Abu Talib who has the honor of raising Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. Hazrat Abu Talib, whose house has the honour that first dawaat - e- Islam was held at not in Qaba but at the house of Hazrat Abu Talib even though Qaba was in Mecca too...
Why to sunnis if someone insults companions diserves a puinsihment and a person who Nauzubillah calls a Mohsin -e- Islam Kafir doesnt diserve punsihment.......
[/quote]
Abu Talib didn’t covert to Islam. But I still respect him as he was the uncle of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and because he raised, protected and supported him against the Quraysh.
Abu Talib used to say to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): “We love to help, accept your advice and believe in your words. These are your kin people whom you have collected and I am one of them, but I am fastest to do what you like. Do what you have been ordered. I shall protect and defend you, but I cannot quit my religion.”
When Abu Talib was on his deathbed The Prophet said: "Say: There is none worthy of worship but Allah, a word with which I will be able to negotiate or argue for you in Allah's presence”. Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Umaya were also present they said, "O Abu Talib! Will you leave the religion of Abdul Muttalib?" Sadly to this Abu Talib said, “I am on the religion of Abdul Muttalib” just before he died. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was very grieved by this and said “I will keep on asking for Allah's forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden to do so."
Then Allah the Exalted revealed the following verse:
“It is not (proper) for the Prophet and those who believe to ask Allah’s Forgiveness for the Mushrikun, even though they be of kin, after it has become clear to them that they are dwellers of the Fire.” (The holy Quran 9:113)
and also:
“Verily, you (O Muhammad pbuh) guide not whom you like, but Allah guides whom He wills. And He knows best those who are the guided.” (The holy Quran 28:56)
Out of all the non-believers Abu Talib will get the least amount of punishment.
[quote]
Oh please come up with a better excuse then this lame one... They didnt even wait for Maula Ali, who was performing the funeral services.
and what is this incident referring to then...
[/quote]
Like I said before they did attend the funeral prayers and I’ve also told you why they couldn’t attend the burial. If Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was a greedy munafiq and not worthy of being the first Caliph, Why did Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) give allegiance to him? They had some differences at first but these were settled. They did not fight for the Caliphate.
And the hadith of “Ghadeer Khum” is not evidence that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) should have been the first Caliph. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “man kuntu mawlah fa Ali mawlah” and some sources say that after that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also said “allahummu wali man walaah wa adi manadaah (O Allah befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him)”
Shias take the word ‘mawlah’ to mean leader whereas this word has many meanings e.g. friend, lover, cousin, patron, protector, supporter. We say the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) meant love and close relation. If he wanted to say that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) is the next Caliph he would have made that clear by using a word like Caliph or Ameer. Also the Sunni interpretation is supported by the second statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) “O Allah befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him”.
[quote]
Tell me how many sunni mosques you know who were the attack of any shia led terrorism and how many of them in shia's in Palistan....
[/quote]
Shias in Iran have persecuted Muslims belonging to different Sunni sects. They imprisoned Sunni scholars, tortured them, executed them and forcibly made them confess to false accusations without any justifiable reason. They executed Bahman Shakoury in 1986, Sheikh Mawlawi Abdul Aziz was poisoned in 1987, Sheikh Abdul Wahhab Khafi tortured to death in 1990. Sheikh Nasser Sabhani was put in prison for defending Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) where he was killed in 1992.
Sheikh Ahmad Mufti Zadah who at first supported Khomeini’s regime but after seeing Khomeini’s behaviour towards the Ahlus-Sunnah he turned against him, he was imprisoned for 10 years. They imprisoned Sheikh Ibrahim Dammini, Sheikh Mawlawi Muhyiddin and Sheikh Dost Mohammed Sirawani. They severely tortured Mawlawi Nathar Mohammad and made him confess to false accusations until he escaped to Pakistan.
The Sunni mosques they have destroyed are Al-Sunnah mosque in Ahwaz, Tareeth Ham mosque in Kharasan, Mosque & School of Lakour in Jabahar, Al-Sunnah mosque in Shiraz, Sheikh Faydh mosque in Mashhad, Ahlus Sunnah School in Talish and Aaban mosque in Mashhad city amongst others.
And I also have some relatives (Balochis) from my mom’s side of the family who are from Iran and from what they say Iran sounds like hell for Sunnis especially in Shia dominated areas.
[quote]
but thats a nice but dumb logic you came up with
"Shias are smaller sect, there fore they murder less and their actions don't get any publicity in Irani media......"
what on earth are you talking about shias are not in minority in Iran to start with... but think about this way... even though shias are a minority they are murdered in such big numbers that compare to sunnis you will get to hear a lot about shia mosques attack in Pakistan....
[/quote]
I meant Shias are a minority compared to Sunni Muslim; I wasn’t talking specifically about Iran
[quote]
]Do you deny the fact that some of Holy Prophet companions disobyed him in the battle of Ohad and ran after maal-e-ganeemat
[/quote]
The ones who disobeyed the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) were Abdullah bin Ubayy and 300 of his companions who ran away from the battle of Uhud. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) marched to the battlefield of Uhud by the side of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and was even ready to kill his son Abdur Rehman who was on the opposing side but the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) stopped him saying, “Sheath your sword, and let us continue to profit by your wise counsels."
[quote]
...do you deny the fact Abu Bakr didnt gave back fidaq to Bibi Fatima for whose purity is mentioned in Quran...
[/quote]
What has purity got to do with being right or wrong? All human beings except for the Prophets made mistakes. In Islam relationships do not matter when it comes to religion. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) once said, "if Fatimah bint Muhammad had committed this crime (stealing), I would issue the punishment order on her too" Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) didn’t deny the purity of Bibi Fatima Al-Zahra (may Allah be pleased with her) or the Ahlul Bait. Quran is understood in the light of Ahadith. The verse was talking about the common folk not the inheritance of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)’s children.
[quote]
So based in your definition Ayesha disobeying Quran who asks her to stay in her house in the verse 33:33 and she came to battle against Maula Ali was a Murtad.....
[/quote]
“And stay in your houses, and do not display yourselves like that of the times of ignorance, and perform As-Salat, and give Zakat and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah wishes only to remove Ar-Rijs from you, O Ahlul Bait and to purify you with a thorough purification.” (The holy Quran 33:33)
So you admit that Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) is part of the Ahlul Bait?
I’m sure they were allowed to leave their houses when they thought it was extremely necessary as long as they covered themselves appropriately as not to display herself like the women of the time of ignorance. And the war between her and Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was an Ijtihadi error, which Allah forgives. The matter was resolved afterwards between her and Ali (may Allah be pleased with him).
Also Bibi Fatima Al-Zahra (may Allah be pleased with her) is also part of the Ahlul Bait, she must have left her home when she went to ask the Caliph for her share of the inheritance.
[quote]
and where in the name Ayesha mentioned here?
[/quote]
Like I said before the Quran is understood in the light of the Sunnah and there is plenty of evidence to show that this verse is about Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her). Abdullah bin Ubayy was the man who accused and slandered her and on that Allah had revealed the verse.
[quote]
"When they meet those who believe, they say: We Believe;' but We are really
when they are alone with their evil ones, they say:
with you, we (were) only jesting [2:14]."
and which people is quran referring too....??????
or should I say nauzubillah according to your theory if someone insults sahbas should be punsihed... Now what punishment is your so called version of Islam gonna give to Quran?????
[/quote]
You asked me where in name was Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) mentioned in verse 24:25, I ask you where in name are Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman or other Muslim Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them all) mentioned here? This verse is about Abdullah bin Ubayy bin Salul the hypocrite and others like him.
[quote]
and i guess I have posted a few of them... but now you changed your view by sayings those are some hypocrites and so called noble sahabas... I have my reasons to believe just a fellow muslim( not a scholar or mullah) and you have yours and let Allah be the judge... Killing shias is not the answer... Let Allah be the judge of us all.
[/quote]
The ones who were the hypocrites are not called Sahaabah they were Munafiqs.
And as for killing Shias is concerned I never said Shias should be killed. I said those who commit blasphemy by making lies and slanders up against the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) and the wives (whose purity the Quran witnesses) of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) are the ones who should be given the punishment they deserve weather that person is a Sunni, Shia or whatever else.
[quote]
but you were so busy spreading false anti shia propoganda
[/quote]
I apologize if I have said something, which is not true, please can you point it out? Thanks.
Afsoor according to sunni brothers, Islam has a ehsaan of who they call Nauzubillah kafir… just based on hadiths of a book and out of those book sunni’s call some of them to be zaeef… A book that was compiled years after the death of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
Why of all the houses did Allah chose the house of Abu Talib and not Qaba… Why when sunni claims Abu Bakr to be the first muslim… he is no where mentioned in shobay Abi Talib, and a person who was there to support him was a nauzubillah Kafir… but oh well what can you expect out of these lost people… On one hand they claim love for Hazrat Ali, Ali who has the honor to sleep in the bed of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. on the night of hijrat… Ali who was the only companion of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. who stood up against Umar Ibne Abduwad in the battle of Khandaq… and a person who came against him in his greed for Khilafat Mahwiya is also regarded as nauzubillah Ameer ul Momineen… Why did Ayesha came on the battlefield Jamal to start with can you shed some light on that issue too???
Jis keh sadqey seh muslaman heh zamana
Afoos woh shaqz paraya heh abhi taaq
Imran neh diye choda jalaey thay sareh raha
Lekin ap keh kismaat meh andehra heh abhi taaq
Aqeedon koh zabaano keh nahi dil keh zaroorat hoti heh
Nahi ailaan kah mohtaaj Imaan -e- Abu Talib
Are you telling me he wasnt one of thsoe who ran out in the mountains, nor was Umar or Usman???
And what was the so called Extermed Neccesity for her to rage a war against Maula Ali??? One more question… Why did muslims didnt have problem with the first three caliphs and when Ali the person who helped Prophet Mohamamad P.B.U.H. since the first day, when he became caliph personalities regarded a lot by sunnis came to war against him when you yourself said let me quote it for you.
So if the hadith meant love and followed by hadith of friendship and enmity… you got to accept the people who came as enemies to Hazrat Ali in the battles of Jamal were the enemies of God…or accept that the word Maula meant the leader… either case… shia’s not respecting such enemies of Hazrat Ali is justified now Isnt it??? Who wouldnt want to respect the enemy of Allah.
Let me quote you the incident from the website
Look at the light of incident by the verse of Quran:
“O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord; and if you don’t do it, you have not delivered His message (at all); and Allah will protect you from the people …” (Qur’an 5:67)
The last sentence in the above verse indicates that the Prophet [s] was mindful of the reaction of his people in delivering that message but Allah informs him not to worry, for He will protect His Messenger from people.
--------------------------------------------
Then the Messenger of Allah continued:
“Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?”
People cried and answered:
“Yes, O’ Messenger of God.”
Then followed the key sentence denoting the clear designation of 'Ali as the leader of the Muslim ummah. The Prophet [s] held up the hand of 'Ali and said:
“For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla).”
Immediately after the Prophet [s] finished his speech, the following verse of the Qur’an was revealed:
“Today I have perfected your religion and completed my favour upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion.” (Qur’an 5:3)
The above verse clearly indicates that Islam without clearing up matter of leadership after Prophet [s] was not complete, and completion of religion was due to announcement of the Prophet’s immediate successor.
Did you read, Why would Allah ask Prophet and said he’ll protect him from people… not only that the message was so Important that ayat said
“…and if you don’t do it, you have not delivered His message (at all)…”
Thats how importance the message was… and last verse revealed after the Prophet’s message about the completion of religon makes it more important… and this deed was followed by an oath of Alligance… now was Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. taking alligance just to confirm about the freindship… suppose even if he did… that raging war against a person… what would it make them???
stop coming up with lame excuses…that don’t even fit the context… and even if they did…its justifies are not respecting her… and yeah what did you say about Ayesha let me quote you:
At one place you are insulting her by saying whoever is hostile to Hazrat Ali is Allah’s enemy ( and she and Mawiya raged a war against him) and then claim a person who insults such such a hostile person needs to be punished…
And guess what quran has to say about some wives of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
If you two (wives of the Prophet) turn in repentance to Allah - but your hearts are so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet likes). But if you help one another against him, then verily Allah is his Protector - and Jibril, and the righteous among the believers, and the angels are also his helpers. It may be that if he divorced you, his Lord would give him, instead of you, wives better than you - Muslims submitting to Allah, believers, women obedient to Allah, who turn to Allah in repentance, worship Allah sincerely, given to fasting, or emigrants (for the cause of Allah) - previously married and virgins."
Qur’an 66:4-5
These verses of the Holy Qur’an prove that the wives of the Holy Prophet (pbuh&hf) were not the best of the companions.
Now you won’t say nauzubillah quran is insulting the wives of Prophet and needs to be punished now would you???
http://www.al-islam.org/shiism/15.htm#n211
thats where i quoted this from. Sight have references to all the things it talks about.
Let me quote what you said earlier…
Let me quote an ayat of Quran:
"And Solomon inherited from David."Qur’an 27:16
and what do you think about the ayat of Quran is more authentic or some hadith of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
**let me quote again what you said in your own words
**
so now you agree Bibi Fatima Zeha SA was displeased with Abu Bakr… now let me remind you a hadith of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. from no other book than your Sahih Bukhari…
“Lady Fatima is a part of me. Whoever angers her, angers me.” Sahih Bukhari, 5:35
so you would agree with me Abu Bakr angered Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. by displeasing Bibi Fatima Zehara S.A.
**
Ibn Qutaybah records that Lady Fatima al-Zahra’ (pbuh) said to some of the companions: “I take Allah as a witnes, and His angels, that you have angered me and did not please me, and if I meet with the Prophet, I will raise my grievances about you to him.” Al-Imamah wal-Siyasah, ibn Qutaybah, 1:14
Now let me quote what you said earlier and justifications i provided in my previous threads… and ask you the question again.
Let me quote what you said earlier:
and then what do you have to say about the incident of Ghadeer regarding your interpretation on the words of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. :
So its justified that Ayesha raging war against Hazrat Ali A.S. makes her enemy of Allah, and i guess the verse of Quran i quoted might tell you more about the wives of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
and what did you said about Abu Bakr.
and what haidth does Sahih Bukhari has to say about Bibi Fatima Zehra:
**“Lady Fatima is a part of me. Whoever angers her, angers me.” Sahih Bukhari, 5:35 **
So by displeasing Bibi Fatima Zehra Abu Bakr Holy Prophet P.B.U.H. angry.
and now my question is on what bases are you giving the fatwah t that if one insults those whose Allah is the enemy and those who angered Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. should be punished.
http://www.al-islam.org/shiism/16.htm#r228
You made an accusation but never backed up your propoganda:
what lies did shia tell about Imam Jaffar-e-Sadiq…infact thats the difference between us, whom you call Imam’s have teachers, whereas their teacher is our Imam.
so the Allah of Sunnis and Allah of Shias are different?
kewl..I am back to whirrling counterclockwise
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
so the Allah of Sunnis and Allah of Shias are different?
kewl..I am back to whirrling counterclockwise
[/QUOTE]
And where exactly are you getting that idea from????
choro yaar..khatam karo yeh kahani..kuch fayeda nahi
Salaam. Please can you stop posting cut ‘n’ pastes and website links, it gets extremely annoying, what ever you have got to say, say it in your own words and condense it as I don’t have time to read through long articles. Also some of your questions are repeated or interconnected, once is enough.
[quote]
Afsoor according to sunni brothers, Islam has a ehsaan of who they call Nauzubillah kafir.... just based on hadiths of a book and out of those book sunni's call some of them to be zaeef... A book that was compiled years after the death of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
[/quote]
Allah the Self-Sufficient Master and his religion Islam, is not in need of any ones favours (Ehsan). Allah depends on none but all depend on Him. We acknowledge that Abu Talib supported Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) but even if he hadn’t done the Lord God who is As-Samad would have made his religion prevail anyway.
[quote]
Jis keh sadqey seh muslaman heh zamana
Afoos woh shaqz paraya heh abhi taaq
Imran neh diye choda jalaey thay sareh raha
Lekin ap keh kismaat meh andehra heh abhi taaq
Aqeedon koh zabaano keh nahi dil keh zaroorat hoti heh
Nahi ailaan kah mohtaaj Imaan -e- Abu Talib
[/quote]
Please can you speak in English I don’t understand Urdu poetry.
[quote]
Why of all the houses did Allah chose the house of Abu Talib and not Qaba.... Why when sunni claims Abu Bakr to be the first muslim... he is no where mentioned in shobay Abi Talib, and a person who was there to support him was a nauzubillah Kafir..... but oh well what can you expect out of these lost people.... On one hand they claim love for Hazrat Ali, Ali who has the honor to sleep in the bed of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. on the night of hijrat... Ali who was the only companion of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. who stood up against Umar Ibne Abduwad in the battle of Khandaq....
[/quote]
The first invitation to Islam being in the house of Abu Talib does not prove anything. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was to invite his close relatives and his own tribe first to Islam before he made a public announcement. When the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) told them about the new faith and how the angel Gabriel had visited him and asked for their support only Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) responded. Abu Talib had assured him of his support before hand but he did not convert to Islam.
No doubt Ali the Lion of Allah (may Allah be pleased with him) very bravely accepted Amr ibn Abd-Wudd’s challenge who he beheaded.
Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was the friend of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) from early boyhood. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was the first adult male and the first person outside the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to accept Islam. He accepted Islam without any reluctance or hesitation. When he accepted Islam he had 40,000 dirhams with him all of which he spent in the cause of Islam. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was blessed with being the first person to call people to Islam publicly in his sermon at the Kaaba for which he was beaten so severely by Utbah that he fainted and lay there unconscious, covered in cuts bruises and blood. When it was nightfall Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) regained consciousness, do you know what the first words he spoke were? “What happened to the Messenger of Allah? What happened to the Messenger of Allah?” his mother offered him food but he said he wont eat until he is assured the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is alright so they carried him to where the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was and our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) started crying on seeing the state his companion. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) hugged him and he held the hug as the Muslims gathered around them. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) had the honour of accompanying the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in the migration from Mecca to Medina.
Allah mentioned him in the Quran:
If you help him (Muhammad SAW) not (it does not matter), for Allah did indeed help him when the disbelievers drove him out, the second of two, when they (Muhammad SAW and Abu Bakr) were in the cave, and he (SAW) said to his companion (Abu Bakr): "Be not sad (or afraid), surely Allah is with us." Then Allah sent down His Sakinah (calmness, tranquillity, peace, etc.) upon him, and strengthened him with forces (angels) which you saw not, and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowermost, while it was the Word of Allah that became the uppermost, and Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise. (The holy Quran 9:40)
Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was given the glad tidings of paradise during his life by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was the first person to liberate slaves in the way of God. He was the only one who was given the titles ‘Siddiq’ and ‘Atiq’ by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). The land for Masjid an-Nabvi was bought with the money of Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him). He was the first person to liberate slaves in the way of Allah. When the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) asked for contributions towards the Tabuk expedition Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) gave all that he had. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) appointed Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) as the first one to lead the Hajj in the history of Islam. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was ordered by the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to lead the prayers many times and when our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was on his deathbed he ordered that Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) be the one to lead the Muslims in prayer. After the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) rightfully became our first Caliph he fought against the apostates, he conquered Syria and Iraq. Before he died Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) refunded the entire amount of allowance he had got from the state treasury during his Caliphate back to the state treasury. No doubt he was the best of the Sahaabah and the most deserving to become Caliph.
The verses of the holy Quran that you mention do refer to Aisha and Hafsah (may Allah be pleased with them).
Aisha and Hafsah (may Allah be pleased with them) loved the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and any wife would be jealous of her co-wives, the more nobler the man the more jealous she will be of the others and our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was the best of creation. Naturally they we jealous of the other wives, who in this case was Zainab (may Allah be pleased with her) because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon her) would spend time with her and eat honey at her house. So Aisha and Hafsah (may Allah be pleased with them) agreed that whoever’s house the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) comes to first will complain to him. When the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) visited them one of them did complain and on this the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) told them ok he would not eat honey there any more, it was on this that Allah revealed chapter At-Tahrim of the Quran, Allah says to him “O Prophet! Why do you ban (for yourself) that which Allah has made lawful to you, seeking to please your wives? And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Allah has already ordained for you, the dissolution of your oaths. And Allah is your Maula and He is the All-Knower, the All-Wise.” (The holy Quran 66:1-2) Allah later on goes to warn his wives not to let them be so jealous as to oppose that which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) likes.
And as for the war between Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) and Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), that did not occur out of love for leadership or money or anything it happened because some people killed the Caliph in the forbidden months and they wanted our fourth Caliph (may Allah be pleased with him) to avenge his death whereas he had other things to sort out first. I didn’t say wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) were perfect, they did make some errors and have shortcomings and this was another ijtihadi error, which Allah will forgive. Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) forgave her and others who were on the opposing side, he made sure that she left the battle ground safely.
After the battle Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) prayed the funeral prayer of the dead Muslims on both sides now if our leader Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) forgave his enemies and didn’t label them disbelievers then who are any of us to start making judgements about them? Like I said before some of the companions did make errors but their good deeds far outweighed them and compared to them our good deeds do not even equal the dust on their shoes.
And as for Muaawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) and his family, Allah the Exalted knows best how much hatred I have for his son Yazeed because of who our Al-Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred. But as for Muaawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) himself, he wasn’t perfect but the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) praised him on many occasions and we can’t attribute disbelief or hypocrisy to him because Al-Hassan (may Allah be pleased with him) withdrew from the Caliphate and gave it to Muaawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) and Al-Hassan (may Allah be pleased with him) would never ever tolerate a disbeliever ruling over the Muslims let alone willingly handing over the Caliphate to him. Some people say that Ali and Al-Hassan (may Allah be pleased with them) were forced into giving up the Caliphate but I can’t believe that because Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was the lion of Allah who feared no one but his Lord, he faced the disbelievers in Mecca when the Muslims numbered less than 40. And Al-Hassan (may Allah be pleased with him) was the grandson of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Son of Ali and Bibi Fatima Al-Zahra (may Allah be pleased with them) and he was not a coward but a brave man who never let the believers be ruled by a disbeliever.
The verse you pointed to about Solomon (peace be upon him) inheriting David (peace be upon him) is not talking about material inheritance rather it is talking about knowledge and the ability to converse with animals and birds, the verse just before it and the rest of the verse proves this. Also this hadith from your own sources proves this, Ali ibn Ibrahim narrates from his father, from Hammad ibn Isa, on the authority of [Abdullah ibn Maymun] al-Qaddah that Abu Abdillah [Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq] alayhis salaam said: Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa alihi wassallam said: “Whoever walks a path seeking therein knowledge, Allah will lead him on a road to Jannah… And the Ullama are heirs of the Ambiyaa; and the Ambiyaa did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance; but they left knowledge. Therefore whosoever takes knowledge has taken a great portion.” (Al-Kafi)
And as for Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warning against angering Bibi Fatima Al-Zahra (may Allah be pleased with her) then I agree it is wrong to anger her. But Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was in a no win situation, being a Muslim and the Caliph he had to obey the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)’s order and being the Caliph he was setting an example for the Ummah. The order of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) comes before any other human beings order.
[quote]
Do you deny the fact that some of Holy Prophet companions disobyed him in the battle of Ohad and ran after maal-e-ganeemat
Are you telling me he wasnt one of thsoe who ran out in the mountains, nor was Umar or Usman??????????
[/quote]
As for the companions disobeying the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) at the battle of uhud is concerned when the Muslim archers on the front line saw that the idol-worshippers had been routed and had turned back and had gone very far the Muslims who were certain of victory turned towards the camp assuming the idol-worshippers wouldn’t come back but they did come back to counter attack as soon as the Muslim archers realised they headed for their positions, Mas'ab bin Umair got martyred and he bore some resemblance to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) on which a shout went up “Muhammad has been killed”. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) then got wounded and fell and so Ali and Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them) rushed to the place where the holy Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) lay wounded they helped him out of the pit and with the aid of other companions took him to a safer place. Meanwhile the Quraysh were still shouting “Muhammad has been killed” which disheartened and shocked the Muslims and the Quraysh started getting the upper hand but then Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) shouted that no he is well and alive. On regaining consciousness the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered Ali (may Allah be pleased with him to launch a counter attack, Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) did counterattack and caused a lot of damage to the enemy on which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) gave him the title ‘The Lion of Allah’.
And like I said before some of the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) did make mistakes and have some shortcomings for which they repented but their good deeds and sacrifices in the way of Islam outweighed them by far.
[quote]
You made an accusation but never backed up your propoganda.
[/quote]
Which propaganda? Point it out to me.
[quote]
what lies did shia tell about Imam Jaffar-e-Sadiq...infact thats the difference between us, whom you call Imam's have teachers, whereas their teacher is our Imam.
[/quote]
Lies like him looking down on people and calling them dirt when he didn’t and other stuff in Usool al-Kaafi etc..
And as for our Imams being his students doesn’t mean anything, our Imams learnt knowledge from a lot of people not just Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq. And we don’t follow any Imam blindly or strictly because they were human beings and made mistakes.
And Allah Ta’ala knows best.
Let me make it clear I am not a scholar nor a mullah all what I am saying is my personal opinion regarding islam..
[QUOTE]
The verses of the holy Quran that you mention do refer to Aisha and Hafsah (may Allah be pleased with them).
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
Aisha and Hafsah (may Allah be pleased with them) loved the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and any wife would be jealous of her co-wives, the more nobler the man the more jealous she will be of the others and our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was the best of creation. Naturally they we jealous of the other wives, who in this case was Zainab (may Allah be pleased with her) because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon her) would spend time with her and eat honey at her house. So Aisha and Hafsah (may Allah be pleased with them) agreed that whoever’s house the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) comes to first will complain to him. When the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) visited them one of them did complain and on this the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) told them ok he would not eat honey there any more, it was on this that Allah revealed chapter At-Tahrim of the Quran, Allah says to him “O Prophet! Why do you ban (for yourself) that which Allah has made lawful to you, seeking to please your wives? And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Allah has already ordained for you, the dissolution of your oaths. And Allah is your Maula and He is the All-Knower, the All-Wise.” (The holy Quran 66:1-2) Allah later on goes to warn his wives not to let them be so jealous as to oppose that which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) likes.
[/QUOTE]
and let me quote the ayat again
If you two (wives of the Prophet) turn in repentance to Allah - but your hearts are so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet likes). But if you help one another against him, then verily Allah is his Protector - and Jibril, and the righteous among the believers, and the angels are also his helpers. It may be that if he divorced you, his Lord would give him, instead of you, wives better than you - Muslims submitting to Allah, believers, women obedient to Allah, who turn to Allah in repentance, worship Allah sincerely, given to fasting, or emigrants (for the cause of Allah) - previously married and virgins."
now care to tell me who are two wives Allah is asking for repent ence and warning them... ain't you the one who just mentioned two of the wives have problem with the Prophet MOhammad P.B.U.H. and were jealous..... but then you ignored it by saying it werent the two...without any justifications.... How ignorant
[QUOTE]
And as for Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warning against angering Bibi Fatima Al-Zahra (may Allah be pleased with her) then I agree it is wrong to anger her. But Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was in a no win situation, being a Muslim and the Caliph he had to obey the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)’s order and being the Caliph he was setting an example for the Ummah. The order of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) comes before any other human beings order.
[/QUOTE]
Man how lost can you sunni pals can go.. he displeased Bibi Fatima Zehra SA to follow the order of Prophet Mohamad P.B.U.H. even though Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. warned who ever makes Bibi Fatima angry makes HIM angry... you know your believes contradict themselves.... or would you say nauzubillah if BiBi Fatima wasn't righteous why would Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. give such a hadith... Abu Bakr could have left his greed aside and followed the order of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H. and not displeased Bibi Fatimia Zehra... but oh well who am i talking too ... sunnis... form what i have noticed in this forum is sunnis will create contradict justifications just to justify the acts of some so called sahabis.... its stange Quran says your religon is complete but to sunnis Prophet left islam with dilemmas... a similar example can be seen in the hadith's
shias believe on a hadith
"It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. I am leaving for you two precious things and if you adhere to them both, you will never go astray after me. They are the Book of Allah and my Progeny, that is my Ahlul Bayt. The two shall never separate from each other until they come to me by the Pool (of Paradise)."
and history witnessed it was Ahley bait who supported islam no matter it was battle of Ohad or Khandaq where none of the companions stood up against Umar ibne abduwad besides Maula Ali, Imam Hussain sacrificed his whole family in the way of Allah to defend islam
where as to justify the right of their caliphs, sunnis said its quran and sunnah...but apparently even though quran has an ayat
"Today I have perfected your religion and completed my favour upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion." (Qur'an 5:3)
and from what i personally see is to them islam is not perfect because Prophet didnt leave a correct source of sunnah... one have to go through several narrators just to see how valid a hadith is...and a lot of their books on sunnah was published after Prophet Mohamamd and an example can be seen above, when there are hadiths that contradicted and created dilemma and Abu Bakr went with the greed....... why would Prophet leave us with such sunnah's and hadith, which creates dillemma's even though quran tesitifies islam to be a perfect religon.
and what happened after people started elected their own khaleefas... people in the greed for khilafat fought wars, Mahwiya was among one of them and then khilafat came in the hand of Yazeed.... a person who shed the blood of the family of Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
[QUOTE]
......which Allah will forgive. Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) forgave her and others who were on the opposing side, he made sure that she left the battle ground safely.
[/QUOTE]
any refernces......well its up Allah to forgive but any refernces when did Ali forgave her......
[QUOTE]
And like I said before some of the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) did make mistakes and have some shortcomings for which they repented but their good deeds and sacrifices in the way of Islam outweighed them by far.
[/QUOTE]
and how do you know they overweighed or they mgiht have repententred, but its Allah who give repentence.
One more question , the issue of khilafat was so important to some companions, that it couldnt have waited until the funeral ceremony of Propeht Mohammad P.B.U.H. why is there no khaleefa now?
^
i dont want to be pushing any useless debates, but some people r still crying over the khilafat issue, 1400 years after the whole thing happened, and u say was the issue that important??? 
[QUOTE]
And as for Muaawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) and his family, Allah the Exalted knows best how much hatred I have for his son Yazeed because of who our Al-Hussain (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred. But as for Muaawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) himself, he wasn’t perfect but the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) praised him on many occasions and we can’t attribute disbelief or hypocrisy to him because Al-Hassan (may Allah be pleased with him) withdrew from the Caliphate and gave it to Muaawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) and Al-Hassan (may Allah be pleased with him) would never ever tolerate a disbeliever ruling over the Muslims let alone willingly handing over the Caliphate to him. Some people say that Ali and Al-Hassan (may Allah be pleased with them) were forced into giving up the Caliphate but I can’t believe that because Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was the lion of Allah who feared no one but his Lord
[/QUOTE]
and the question is didnt he come to war against maula Ali as an enemy, and what did you yourself said about the hadith about Maula Ali
[QUOTE]
Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also said “allahummu wali man walaah wa adi manadaah (O Allah befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him)”
[/QUOTE]
but again like i said what i personally have noticed in this forum they have to cook up some story to justify their acts...no matter they contradicts to their other believes... even though quran calls ilsam a perfect religon...
and whats the justification here
Imam Hassan won't have given khilafat to Mawiya but you over looked the fact that Imam Hassan just didnt give khilafat away he did a sullah and one of the sharaits of the sullah if i remember right was that mawiya won't insult Imam Ali from the mimbar... since you are a mullah you can share it with us. I agee Imam Hassain is not a coward May be Imam Hassan didnt fought Mawiya for khilafat because of the current situation of Islam, there might be only a few true muslims left and he didnt want to dis unite them... whatever the reason is I am sure if you read the clauses of sullah that can clear it up...but no he just didnt give him away khilafat like that....rather than war he went with sullah
but it no way justified the hadith Saif ul Islam you yourself quoted that any one who is hostile to Hazrat Ali is the enemy of Allah.... based on the light of the hadith... he is an enemy of Allah, and all the counter agruments you came up with to defend your respect for this enemy of Allah are just lame excuses..... when you believe in a hadith.... based on it someone is an enemy of Allah he is...why cook lame excuses to respect an enemy of Allah......how many other contradicting stories to your hadiths are you going to come up with to defend your respect for the enemies of Allah? its stange how many muslims were there thirsty for the blood of grandson of the Prophet Mohammad P.B.U.H.
whats suprises me is ... everyone who became khaleefa is regarded as Ameer ul Momineen by sunni's then why dont they regard yazeed as a khaleefa, his father fought against Imam Ali ( which based in the light of the hadith you quoted earlier makes him the enemy of Allah) and is regarded as nauzubillah Ameer ul Momineen. why not yazeed then...to me its the history of Karbala that unveiled the face of what happend to Islam when they left dar-e-ahleybait and started electing their own khaleefas. It came in the hands on power greedy people..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Houston_kah_Don: *
And where exactly are you getting that idea from????
[/QUOTE]
because it seems like shias and sunnis are arguing about the differences and never looking at the similarities.
Another good reason to not mix politics with religion.
^ you are forgetting the main reason this thread was opened..there are people in this world that want to kill others just because they have different opinions