Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
According to Quran, the Enemies of Sahabah including the Enemies of Mu'awiyah bin Abu Sufyan radhiyAllahu 'anhu are disbelievers.
These Enemies should, before pointing fingers at Sahabah, know that the Companions of Imam 'Ali were the top class Munafiqeen who betrayed and disappointed him always. They betrayed their Imam when he agreed upon truce with Imam Mu'awiyah and these shias of 'Ali became Khawarij. The same shias of Ali (new Khawarij) killed their own Infallible.
Imam 'Ali's companions (Ibn Ziyad, Shimr) killed the 3rd Infallible...
Now don't make any guess and know that the 2nd Imam was also killed by the same Munafiqeen..
These shias slander Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam while they are the children of those shias who always betrayed their Infallibles.
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
Muaweyah (ra) is a sahabi of ht Prophet (saw) and it wud be appreciated if shiaa members here do not call him a munafiq and use other bad names for him....
if u dont respect certain people, keep the views to yourselves but make sure there is no mud-slinging here in the public forums....
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
kharijis only considered abubakr(ra) and umar(ra) as the rightful caliphs they were never shiat-e-Ali
They only sided with Ali(as) to fight against the syrians
[QUOTE]
Imam 'Ali's companions (Ibn Ziyad, Shimr) killed the 3rd Infallible...
[/QUOTE]
just because they served in the caliphate of Ali(as) dosent make them companions of Ali
Companions of Ali were others and many of them were companions of the prophet(saw)
..
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
[quote]
Why is that you cannot stomach anything good about the Companions of the Prophet (saw), may Allah (saw) be pleased with them all?
. if you read my posts again I have no problem at all when you praise the pious companions of the prophet(saw) like Talha(ra) zubair(ra) or umer(ra) etc believe me.Infact I frankly admit all the good qualities they possesed They deserve to be praised for all the services they did to Islam but for God's sake do not include amongst their ranks "freed ones" like muawiyah and amr ibn as
my policy is give credit where it is due dosent matter which "camp" you belong to
[quote]
Also, later Hz. Hassan bin Ali (ra) abdicated from Khilaafat in favour of Hz. Muawiyah (ra), do you seriously think that Hz. Hassan (ra) will let a munafiq to be at the helm of Muslim affairs? I am sure you will come up with many excuses, just keep them with you
[/quote]
have you read the exchange of letters between hasan(as) and muawiyah?.
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
if u dont respect certain people, keep the views to yourselves but make sure there is no mud-slinging here in the public forums....
Alright......... but some people here call Malik-e-Ashtar(ra) another companion of the prophet(saw) and hero of the battle of yarmuk
a "munafiq"
that is totally unacceptable they should also be reprimended
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
if you read my posts again
I have no problem at all when you praise the pious companions of the prophet(saw) like Talha(ra) zubair(ra) or umer(ra) etc believe me.Infact I frankly admit all the good qualities they possesedThey deserve to be praised for all the services they did to Islam but for God's sake do not include amongst their ranks "freed ones" like muawiyah and amr ibn as
my policy is give credit where it is due dosent matter which "camp" you belong to
Well, this is the sign of disbelief (kufr), according to Quran, to get enraged by Ameerul Mumineen Mu'awiyah radhiyAllahu 'anhu and Amr bin Al'aas radhiyAllahu 'anhu.
[quote]
have you read the exchange of letters between hasan(as) and muawiyah?
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
kharijis only considered abubakr(ra) and umar(ra) as the rightful caliphs they were never shiat-e-Ali
They only sided with Ali(as) to fight against the syrians
just because they served in the caliphate of Ali(as) dosent make them companions of Ali
Companions of Ali were others and many of them were companions of the prophet(saw)
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
It’s good to hear that you have no problem with the Companions (May Allah (swt) be pleased with them all) of the Prophet (saw). You are really a very diluted Shia (Please pardon my expression if you do not like it) because the main crux of Shia faith is to prove and believe that except a few [varies between 4 – 7 persons, I think] all the Companions of the Prophet (saw) ‘renegaded’ from Islam and you know what that implies.
All the companions of the Prophet (saw) were pious. Of course the degree of their piety varied by their ranks. No human with the exception of the Prophets (Peace be upon them all) is infallible and this applies to all the Companions and the family of the Prophet (saw).
Putting Hz. Muawiyah (ra) on the same rank as that of Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra) and Hz. Hassan bin Ali (ra) is like comparing a candle to the sun. This is the belief of all Sunnis without any exception.
You may fault his (Hz. Muawiyah (ra)’s) actions but you cannot call him a munafiq as I proved to you from the very pious lips of Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra) that he considered him to be on the same faith as his own with any iota of a difference.
Tell me, do you claim to know more than Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra)?
Now if you are going to quote some narration from Shia books that Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra) considered Hz. Muawiyah (ra) a munafiq then that goes against Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra). [Putting is crudely that means speaking with a forked tongue – and we all know that Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra) was much beyond that (making fork-tongued statements)]
Please pay heed to the following ayahs and let Allah (swt) be the judge and surely He (swt) is the best of Judges. You will have to give account of your deeds and not of anyone else.
That was a people that have passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case! 2:134 & 2:141
And those who came (into the faith) after them say: Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who were before us in the faith, and place not in our hearts any rancour toward those who believe. Our Lord! Thou art Full of Pity, Merciful. 59:10
I have read some of the letters (allegedly) written by Hz. Hassan bin Ali (ra) to Hz. Muawiyah (ra) quite some time ago.
The question arises: Is it possible for pious personality like Hz. Hassan (ra) to abdicate from Khilaafat in favour of a person who is not a Muslim? Keep in mind that in Islam Munafiqs are not Muslims. You mean to say that Hz. Hassan (ra) had no other option than to retire from leading the Ummah?
And keep in mind too that history books are always biased without any exception.
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
[quote]
It’s good to hear that you have no problem with the Companions (May Allah (swt) be pleased with them all) of the Prophet (saw). You are really a very diluted Shia (Please pardon my expression if you do not like it)
no problem infact true shias of Ali(as) will follow the guidelines he laid down as they consider him the most qualified to interpret Islam after Holy Prophet(saw)
Ali(as) himself a participant in all ghazwas against the kuffar was wellknown for the regard he had for brave fighters like Talha(ra) and Sa'd(ra)
But shiat-e-Ali believed that Ali(as) judgement was superior to them when it came to making decisions in the light of Quran and sunnah
if people cant admit the piety of Abubakr(ra) the evenhandedness of Umar(ra) and bravery of Talha(ra) that is their problem. what I disagree with is their actions in relation to Ali(as)
Salman(ra) and Ammar(ra) served under Umar(ra) who amongst us can claim to be a bigger partisan of Ali(as) than them.
here lies the biggest hurdle
some Shias exaggerate their flaws while sunnis deny that they ever had any faults at all
[quote]
because the main crux of Shia faith is to prove and believe that except a few [varies between 4 – 7 persons, I think] all the Companions of the Prophet (saw) ‘renegaded’ from Islam and you know what that implies
[/quote]
That is a wrong concept that is not a part of fiqah-e-jafaria
although i must say that a good many shias do exactly what you are saying so i cannot blame you for thinking that way
secondly no one can claim that anyone "renegaded" from Islam without clear historical proof.
how can only 4-7 companions remain true to faith when such a large number of them supported Ali(as) against the syrians?
any shias who claim that surely have no historical background of the fitna.
[quote]
All the companions of the Prophet (saw) were pious. Of course the degree of their piety varied by their ranks. No human with the exception of the Prophets (Peace be upon them all) is infallible and this applies to all the Companions and the family of the Prophet (saw).
[/quote]
I dont have any problem with that ....I respect your views
but shias hold that the family of Prophet(saw) has special place in Islam which makes them infalliable but who constitutes the family does it include all the wives or not is a seperate discussion altogather and not that I wish to discuss here
[quote]
[quote]
You may fault his (Hz. Muawiyah (ra)’s) actions but you cannot call him a munafiq as I proved to you from the very pious lips of Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra) that he considered him to be on the same faith as his own with any iota of a difference.
Tell me, do you claim to know more than Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra)?
[/quote]
Now if you are going to quote some narration from Shia books that Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra) considered Hz. Muawiyah (ra) a munafiq then that goes against Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra). [Putting is crudely that means speaking with a forked tongue – and we all know that Hz. Ali ibn Talib (ra) was much beyond that (making fork-tongued statements)]
[/quote]
I will reply to this later but believe me what I say against the ummayyads is not from shia books but only from western or sunni accounts
[quote]
Please pay heed to the following ayahs and let Allah (swt) be the judge and surely He (swt) is the best of Judges. You will have to give account of your deeds and not of anyone else.
That was a people that have passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case! 2:134 & 2:141
And those who came (into the faith) after them say: Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who were before us in the faith, and place not in our hearts any rancour toward those who believe. Our Lord! Thou art Full of Pity, Merciful. 59:10
[/quote]
I agree broadly with what you are saying
I do not bring up every petty dispute the sahabas ever had amongst themselves afterall they were all humans sometimes some were right at other times they were wrong.
But there are times in history when some individuals acted in clear violations of islamic injunctions despite being in position of authority it is those instances that need to be remembered classic example would be the martyrdom of Hujr ibn Adi(ra) to whose piety even Ayesha and Abdullah ibn Umar(ra) testified despite the fact that he was a partisan of Ali(as)
[quote]
The question arises: Is it possible for pious personality like Hz. Hassan (ra) to abdicate from Khilaafat in favour of a person who is not a Muslim? Keep in mind that in Islam Munafiqs are not Muslims. You mean to say that Hz. Hassan (ra) had no other option than to retire from leading the Ummah?
[/quote]
There were certain conditions under which he abdicated but not one of them was kept by muawiyah.
also we need to see the situation at the time when this decision was taken
the dwindling support of shiat-e-Ali in Iraq had little to do with the "will of God" as some call it but a vicious propoganda and bribery campaign intiated by Muawiyah and it would be fair to say that many nobles wo were annoyed with Ali(as) for his equal distribution of Fay tax switched loyalties to muawiyah.Nahjul Balagah is full of condemnation of such people but to think that all shias are descended from them is highly inaccurate view
infact most of iraq did not have a shia population until many years later.the Tawabbun movement after karbala was responsible for that
even the brother of Ali(as) went over to muawiyah because Ali(as) would not give them anything above his due from bayt-ul-mal.
so the criteria of being a true Shait-e-Ali has nothing to do with tribal loyalties but everything to do with personal qualities that his why his supporters constituted such a diverse group of people
For Ali(as) and his loyal followers there were many restrictions placed on them by religion which they would not violate under any circumstances even if that meant certain defeat in this world while Muawiyah and his followers followed the policy of "end justifies the means". This is the critical jucture where the fight between them becomes not just a simple political struggle but a religious one
btw munafiq i thought is a "hypocrite" a person who pretends to be a muslim but is actually not
[quote]
And keep in mind too that history books are always biased without any exception
[/quote]
.
I would agree most are but not all
exaggerations by both shias and sunnis have crept up in most historical accounts and that is where the benefit of doubt should go to the person who is being accused of something
However having said that some instances are recorded in almost all historical works with little or no variation it is there where it is reasonable to assume that they are authentic
Lastly I would say that the only reason I posted here is not because I couldnt bear to see the praises of sahaba.
They were surely soldiers of Allah but what the poster is deliberatly trying to do is make the ummayyad caliphs equal to the rightly guided ones and that is unacceptable
*conquests made after the pious caliphate were made for the sake of ummayyad imperial glory and had little to do with spreading the egalitarian message of islam *
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
Das Reich
How refreshing are your views. I almost agree with you but with few exceptions.
You have agreed that your views are that of very small minority of Shias and at variance with ‘run of the mill’ Shias.
Allah (swt) had blessed all the prominent Companions (raa) of the Prophet (saw) one way or the other. Some were blessed with bravery, some with wealth, others with sagacity and others with other human qualities. They all utilised these in way of Allah (swt) to assist His Prophet accomplish his mission.
That is the very reason the there are many ayahs in the Quran where Allah states His pleasure with the Companions and has promised them paradise and a great success.
Not doubt of Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra)’s bravery and other qualities. But you must admit that spreading of Islam at the time of the Prophet (saw) was a collective action and not a two-man mission (that’s the impression one gets reading through Shia literature).
Will it no suffice to you that Sunnis do not consider anyone but the Prophets (Peace be upon them all) to infallible? Sunnis do not confer infallibility on any Companion of the Prophet (saw) whether the person be Hz. Abu Bakr (ra), Hz.Omar (ra) Hz. Uthman (ra) or Hz. Ali (ra).
No one is defending Ummayyad Dynasty. The Prophet (saw) had foretold that after Khalifah al Nubuwwah (about 30 years after the Prophet (saw) the Khilaafah will become ‘kingship’ the the Khaleefs will have some good and some bad. And that this will degenerate further.
That’s true. So in other words he is not a Muslim.
In your previous posts you had labelled Hz. Muawiyah (ra) as a hypocrite.
Whereas, I had shown you that Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) considered him to be a Muslim of sound and sincere Belief.
I tend to agree with Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) and your views are at a variance, in fact opposite.
I don’t think that Debater is “deliberately trying to make the ummayyad caliphs equal to the rightly guided ones."
I think he made the purpose of this thread very clear on the onset.
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
Just want some clarification.
So ahle-sunnah don’t believe it was Hind who ate the liver of Hazrat Hamza (a.s.)? I mean it was even in the movie “The message”.
Ibn Sadique bhai.. if my memory serves me correct I think ages ago you seemed to mention that you believe that out of the Khalifas, only 4 was the rightly guided ones but in a thread that dissappeared from the Rel. Forum recently Debater bhai mentioned [if my memory serves me correct] that they all were right guided including the 5th and the 6th Caliph. Could you clarify for me pls?
I am sorry if I am going off topic but Armughal, it’s hard for me to imagine the difference was political. Everything Hazrat Ali a.s. did was Fisabililah. The Prophet pbuh had said truth is with Ali a.s. and Ali a.s. is with truth. And did the Prophet pbuh say about Ammar bin Yassir a.s.? Wasn’t he killed in the Battle of Sifeen?
Even Bukhari narrates
(10) Narrated 'Ikrima: that Ibn 'Abbas told him and 'Ali bin 'Abdullah to go to Abu Said and listen to some of his narrations; So they both went (and saw) Abu Said and his brother irrigating a garden belonging to them. When he saw them, he came up to them and sat down with his legs drawn up and wrapped in his garment and said, "(During the construction of the mosque of the Prophet) we carried the adobe of the mosque, one brick at a time while 'ammar used to carry two at a time. The Prophet passed by 'ammar and removed the dust off his head and said, “May Allah be merciful to 'ammar. He will be killed by a rebellious aggressive group. 'ammar will invite them to (obey) Allah and they will invite him to the (Hell) fire.” (Book #52](52. Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihaad) - Sahih Al-Bukhari - 0 - 67), Hadith #67](52. Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihaad) - Sahih Al-Bukhari - 0 - 67))
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
[quote]
How refreshing are your views. I almost agree with you but with few exceptions.
You have agreed that your views are that of very small minority of Shias and at variance with ‘run of the mill’ Shias.
I appreciate your kind remarks but the
"run of the mill shias" might not have knowledge of the events and in their ignorance sometimes say something that is totally uncalled for
but I can assure you that there are many many shias who refrain from any "sledging" and contrary to popular belief cursing is not a requirement to be a shia
please also remember that cursing of Ali(as) was started by ummayyads more specifically muawiyyah
[quote]
Not doubt of Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra)’s bravery and other qualities. But you must admit that spreading of Islam at the time of the Prophet (saw) was a collective action and not a two-man mission (that’s the impression one gets reading through Shia literature).
[/quote]
That is unfortunate if you get that impression but shias and sunnis both are guilty of distorting history to a certain extent like you said no book is free from bias.
But if you admit the good qualities and brave exploits of any particular sahaba it dosent make you any less of a shia they were afterall comrades of Ali(as) for a good part of his life and it is natural that he felt affection for them
one only needs to read the conversation b/w Ali(as) and Zubair(ra) to get a idea of that
[quote]
Will it no suffice to you that Sunnis do not consider anyone but the Prophets (Peace be upon them all) to infallible? Sunnis do not confer infallibility on any Companion of the Prophet (saw) whether the person be Hz. Abu Bakr (ra), Hz.Omar (ra) Hz. Uthman (ra) or Hz. Ali (ra).
[/quote]
You are free to believe in what you like I have no problem with that but before some people(not you) start calling shias kafir they should take a look at the their past
also some mistakes were more grave than others and had serious consequences for the islamic world so they cannot be simply disregarded
[quote]
No one is defending Ummayyad Dynasty. The Prophet (saw) had foretold that after Khalifah al Nubuwwah (about 30 years after the Prophet (saw) the Khilaafah will become ‘kingship’ the the Khaleefs will have some good and some bad. And that this will degenerate further.
[/quote]
True
[quote]
That’s true. So in other words he is not a Muslim.
In your previous posts you had labelled Hz. Muawiyah (ra) as a hypocrite.
Whereas, I had shown you that Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) considered him to be a Muslim of sound and sincere Belief.
I tend to agree with Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) and your views are at a variance, in fact opposite.
[/quote]
Not really if you read the other letters in Nahjul Balagah that becomes clear
You see I cannot find one quality in muawiyah worthy of a momin
so my position on him is as before
I
[quote]
don’t think that Debater is “deliberately trying to make the ummayyad caliphs equal to the rightly guided ones."
I think he made the purpose of this thread very clear on the onset
[/quote]
Previously he posted a list of 12 rightly guided caliphs that included men like muawiyah yazid and Abdul malik and not Ali(as)
Now even if we set aside the Karbala episode for the moment
Does he think pillaging Medina and hurling fire at Kaaba is a sign of piety?if this is what he thinks is "rightly-guided" then I am glad that Ali(as) is not on his list
and I would even urge my sunni brothers to ask him what did the caliphate of Umar(ra) and monarchy of ummayyads had in common?
Umar(ra) humbly declared
"If I am a king,it is something to be afraid of" This lame umayyad attempt to gain legitimacy to the khilafat by associating with the first two caliphs has been their policy since the outset.
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
Yes, Sunnis do believe that Hz. Hinda bint Utbah (ra) ate bit of Hz. Hamza ‘s (ra) liver at the battle of Uhaud. This fact is recorded well in historical and hadith books.
This was done at the time when she was a non Muslim and later after the conquest of Makkah by the Prophet (saw) she embraced Islam. Deeds done before accepting Islam are wiped out clean by Allah (saw).
Interestingly, Wahashi, the Abyssinian slave, who killed Hz. Hamza (ra) also accepted Islam at the hands of the Prophet (saw).
It was he who killed Musalama the false prophet (May he be cursed).
See the following narrations:
“Among those who killed Musailma was Wahshi, the negro slave who had killed Hamza, the uncle of the holy Prophet at Ohud. He had done this to win his freedom. Hind, the wife of Abu Sufyan, had promised to buy him his freedom if he slew Hamza. After the fall of Mecca, Wahshi became a Muslim. The Holy Prophet forgave him but said, “Please Wahshi, keep out of my sight. You remind me of my dear uncle.””
And:
“Umm Hakim, Ikrimah’s wife, then went to the Prophet’s camp. With her were Hind bint Utbah, the wife of Abu Sufyan and the mother of Muawiyah, and about ten other women who wanted to pledge allegiance to the Prophet (PBUH) . Hind was the one who spoke, saying:
“O Messenger of God”, “Praise be to God Who has made manifest the religion He has chosen for Himself. I beseech you out of the bonds of kinship to treat me well. I am now a believing woman who affirms the Truth of your mission.” She then unveiled herself and said:
“I am Hind, the daughter of Utbah.”
“Welcome to you,” replied Prophet Mohamed (PBUH).
“By God, O Prophet” continued Hind, “there was not a house on earth that I wanted to destroy more than your house. Now, there is no house on earth that I so dearly wish to honor and raise in glory than yours.””
Hz. Ikrimah ibn Abu Jahl (ra) an avowed enemy of the Prophet (saw) also accepted Islam as the true faith.
Guidance to Islam is in the hands of Allah (saw) as the following ayahs state: “He (Allah) guides those whom He Wills” [2:142, 2:213; 2:272, 6:88, 10:25, 14:4, 16:93, (22:16), 24:46, 28:56, 35:8, 39:23, 74:31].
**Sis Little Human **
Here’s hadith which you are referring to:
“There will be Nabuwa with Rehma (prophethood with Mercy). The there will be Khilafah with Ba’yah (pledge). Then Allah will change it when He wishes. Then there will be Mulkan ‘Adoodan (Rule by force). Then Allah will change it when He wishes. Then there will be Mulkan Jabriya (against people’s will). Then Allah will change it when He wishes. Then there will be Khilafah Ala Minhajin Nabuwa (on the path of prophethood). The earth and the sky will bestow their treasures.” (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal)
Hudhaifah bin Al-Yaman reported that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam said:
“Prophethood (meaning Muhammad (SAW) himself) will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain, then Allah will raise it up whenever he wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood remaining with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, He will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a reign of violently oppressive [The reign of Muslim kings who are partially unjust] rule and it will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, there will be a reign of tyrannical rule and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, Allah will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Then, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood.”
Then Hudhaifah said, “The Prophet stopped speaking.” [As-Silsilah As-Sahihah, vol. 1, no. 5]
The reign of unjust rule:
This reign contains some injustice to a varying degree between one king and another. This period started after Hadrat Hasan bin Ali radi Allaho Anhu and includes the Umayyad, Abbasid, Mamluks and until the fall of the Great Ottoman Empire in the twentieth century.
This period includes all states that ruled in the Muslim World during those centuries. However, we exclude the reign of those rulers whose rule was similar to the rule of the rightly guided Caliphs, such as the reign of Hadrat Abdullah bin Zubayr Radi Allaho Anhu and Hadrat Umar bin Abdul-Aziz Rahmatulla Aleyh. These two(2) are considered among the just Caliphs from among the tribe of Quresh who ruled or will rule the Muslim nation.
That doesn’t mean that Umayyad, Abbasid and Uthmani rule was all bad. They did serve Islam by defending it and Muslims against foreign Invaders and also added a lot of land to the Islamic World so that it was possible for Islam to be spread to these territories.
You should be aware that Sunnis follow Quran, Sunnah of the Prophet (saw) and the Ijma of the Sahabah (May Allah (swt) be pleased with them all). The Khaleefs held the temporal authority and the righteous scholars held the religious authority as the Prophet (saw) had said that “Scholars are inheritors of the Prophets”
Abu Ad-Dardaa (ra) reported that the Messenger of Allaah (saw) said:
“Indeed, the scholars are the inheritors of the prophets. And indeed, the prophets do not leave behind deenars nor dirhams as inheritance. Rather they only leave behind knowledge as inheritance. So whosoever takes hold of it (i.e. the knowledge), then he has taken hold of a large share (of the inheritance).” (Abu Dawud)
Rest of your question was directed at brother Armughal.
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
**Das Reich ** I missed the above. Can you tell me about their actions in relation to Ali (ra) that you disagree with?
There are many narrations in Sunni books and from “Shia Imams” Muhammad Al Baqeer (rahimullah) and Jaffar As-Sadiq (rahimullah) full of praise for Hz. Abu Bakr As-Sadiq (ra) and Hz. Omar Al Farook (ra).
Re: Soldiers of Allah - the Companions of Muhammad sallAllahu 'alayhe wasallam
its unfortunate that some ppl made a religious issue of it....
It was Munafiqeen who cuased them to fight with each other and it is Munafiqeen who slander Sahabah especially Ameerul Mumineen Mu'awiyah radhiyAllahu 'anhu as he crushed these Munafiqeen successfully mashaAllah.