sunni brothers what do u say about this

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

i got somthin from that book for u all to read

  • for Ali, as the Shiites claim, and not by election and Shura [consultation] as the Sunnis claim.

Any researcher in this subject, if he considers nothing but the truth, will find that the text in support of Ali is very clear, like the following saying by the Messenger of Allah: Whoever considers me his master, then Ali is his master. He said it at the end of the Farewell Pilgrimage, when it was confirmed that Ali would succeed, and many people congratulated him on that, including Abu Bakr and Umar who were among the well-wishers, and who were quoted as having said to the Imam, Well done, Ibn Abi Talib, overnight you have become a master of all the believers." [64]

[64]
Musnad, Ahmed Hanbal, vol 4 p 281
Siyar al Amin, al Ghazali, p 12
Tadhkirat al Awas, Ibn al Jawzi, p 29
Al Riyadh al Nazarah, al Tabari, vol 2 p 169
al Bidayah wan Nihayah, vol 5 p 212
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 2 p 50
Tafsir, al Razi, vol 3 p 63
al Hawi lil Fatawi, al Suyuti, vol 1 p 112
This text has been agreed on by both Shiites and Sunnis, and in fact I have only referred in this study to some Sunni references. and not to all of them, for they are so many.
If the reader wants more information, he may read “al- Ghadir” by al-Amini (thirteen Volumes) in which the writer classifies the sayings of the Prophet according to the Sunnis.

As for the alleged popular election of Abu Bakr on “The Day of al-Saqifah” and his subsequent acclamation in the mosque; it seems that it was just an allegation without foundation. How could it be by popular agreement when so many people were absent during the acclamation? People like: Ali, al-Abbas, most of the house of Bani Hashim, Usama ibn Zayd, al-Zubayr, Salman al-Farisi, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad, Ammar ibn Yasir, Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman, Khuzayma ibn Thabit, Abu Burayd al-Aslami, al-Bura ibn Azib, Abu Ka’b, Sahl ibn Hanif, Saad ibn Ubada, Qays ibn Saad, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari, Jabir ibn Saad, Khalid ibn Saad, and many others. [65]

[65]
Tarikh, al Tabari
Ibn al Athir
Suyuti
Baghdadi
So where was that alleged popular agreement? The absence of Ali alone from the acclamation is sufficient to criticize that meeting because he was the only candidate for the caliphate, nominated by the Messenger of Allah, on the assumption that there was no direct text regarding such a nomination.
The acclamation of Abu Bakr was without consultation, in fact it took the people by surprise, especially when the men in charge of the Muslim affairs were busy preparing for the funeral of the Messenger of Allah. The citizens of al-Medinah were shocked by the death of their Prophet, and then they forced the acclamation [66] on the people. and even threatened to burn the house of Fatima if those who were absent from the acclamation refused to leave it. So how could we say that the acclamation was implemented through consultation and popular agreement?

[66]
Tarikh, Qutaybah, vol 1 p 18
Umar ibn al-Khattab himself testified that that acclamation was a mistake - may Allah protect the Muslims from its evil -, and that whoever repeated it should be killed, or he might have said that if someone called for a similar action there would he no acclamation for him or for those who acclaimed him. [67]
Sahih, Bukhari, vol 4 p 127
Imam Ali said about that acclamation: By Allah, Ibn Abi Quhafa has got it! And he knows that my position [regarding the caliphate] is like that of the pole in relation to the millstone! The torrent flows from me, and the bird will never reach me! [68]
[68]
Sharh, Muhammad Abduh, vol 1 p 34, Sermon as Shaqshaqiyah
Saad ibn Ubada, a prominent man from al-Ansar, attacked Abu Bakr and Umar on the day of “al-Saqifah”, and tried hard to keep them away from the caliphate, but could not sustain his efforts, for he was ill and unable to stand, and after al-Ansar paid homage to Abu Bakr, Saad said: “By Allah I shall never pay homage to you until I cast my last arrow at you, and pierce you with my lance, and attack you with my sword, with all the power in my hand, and fight you with all the members of my family and clan. By Allah, even if all the Jinns [invisible beings] and the human beings gathered to support you, I will never acclaim you, until I meet my God.” He never prayed with them, he never sat in their company, he never performed the pilgrimage with them, and if he found a group of people willing to fight them, he would give them all his support, and if somebody acclaimed him to fight them, he would have fought them. He remained thus until he died in Syria during the caliphate of Umar. [69]
[69]
Tarikh, Qutaybah, vol 1 p 17
If that was a mistake (may Allah protect the Muslims from its evil) as Umar put it (and he was one of its architects, and knew what happened to the Muslims as a result of it), and if that succession to the caliphate was illegal (as Imam Ali described it when he said that he was the lawful nominee for it), and if that acclamation was unjust (as according to Saad ibn Ubada the leader of al-Ansar who left al-Jamaah because of it), and if that acclamation was unlawful due to the absence of the leading figures of the Companions, including al-Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet, so what is the evidence and proof which supports the legality of the Abu Bakr’s succession to the caliphate?
The answer, is that there is no evidence or proof with the Sunnis and al-Jamaah.

Therefore, what the Shiites say regarding this issue is right, because it has been established that the Sunnis have the text which proves the succession of Ali to the caliphate, but they deliberately misinterpret it to maintain the Companion’s honour. Thus, the just and fair person has no choice but to accept the text, especially if he knows the circumstances that surrounded the case. [70]

[70]
al Saqifah wal Khulafah by Abdul Fattah Abdul Maqsood
al Saqifah by Muhammad Rida al Muzaffar ]*

2

Can you change anything now? Just do your five pillars and hold QURAN and SUNNAH tight. STOP it with this sunni and shia thing.

You can't change what has happened. Even if you prove that Ali should have been elected as clipha, there is no way you can remove the speck from the face of Islam!

*V~V~V*He came, He saw, He conquered*V~V~V*

[This message has been edited by The Watcher (edited October 11, 2000).]

3

Shaer

but that is a political difference and not a belief difference is'nt it?

Whether it was wrong or right, it took place after the Quran had been completed and The Prophet had passed away. This Islam was completed as a religion, everything after that would be based on interpretation and not on addition.

4

why respecting such people who were not good muslims?

5

Fraudia

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/ok.gif

Everything after the Prophet, and completion of Islam IS AN INNOVATION! INNOVATIONS ARE HARAM(SIN) IN ISLAM. Agree?

V~V~VHe came, He saw, He conqueredV~V~V**

6

we have to be careful in choice of words..

innovations are not allowed, but
interpretations are allowed.

and whether one is qualified to do an interpretation, and whether an interpretation is logical and valid..thats the tough area.

7

dont change the topic please..i just asked why have so much respect for such people who wernt true muslims

8

The Watcher:

I can see where you are coming from, so I will agree with you here

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

*However, I hope you are not a wahabi, who consider EVERYTHING as bidaat!

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/wink.gif

And only Allah knows best.*

Ah, poor me! I don’t know about you, sherazz, but, man, I would think they all of those whom you mentioned are better muslims than me. I mean look at it from another perspective. They saw the Prophet (PBUH), prayed with him, listened to his voice, fought battles with him, and remained righteous with him through to the end.

Now look at us. 1500 years down the road. We have deviated from Islam, tell lies, trade with interest, probably don’t even pray five times regularly, fast in ramadan (but probably only earn hunger and thirst), look at na-mehram women, listen to songs and dances (probably do these as well)… and still we believe we are muslims. Yes we are. But are we better muslims, then even the junior-most sahabi? I don’t think so. Share your thoughts with us.

Adios!

9

who changed the topic, u asked what other muslims had to say about it and they answered. Maybe you should have made your question more specific then.

Anyway here is my answer to your specific question. Why respect them, i dont know..do i really respect them? does it matter? does it make me a non muslim if i respectthem or if i dis respect them or if I stay neutral and say that alleged political tussle of 1400+ years ago does not change The book that was concluded before that struggle, or if that changes my duties to allah and his creation.

So to me they were the prophet’s companions but nothing they did or did not do at anypoint during or after the life of the prophet changed what Allah had told us.
Do I hold devotional sessions to any of the companions, no.. because i dont hold devotional sessions for anyone..period. Yet at the same time, what good would it do for me to disrespect them

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

10

Brother pristine, anything that is not in quran and hadith and is created for the sake of goodness, is innovation. Agree?

Allah knows best.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

I do not belong to any sect or non-sense like that. All I do is try to follow Islam like it is in Quran and hadith. Anything else is un-islamic.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Sects came into existence way after the death of Prophet and way after the Islam was complete. I am sure if prophet Mohammad(S) was around he would NOT want us to concentrate of this sects and creat sects on basis of your interpretation of hadiths or verses of Quran.

They moment someone interprets something differently, they go ahead and creat another sect.

V~V~VHe came, He saw, He conqueredV~V~V**

[This message has been edited by The Watcher (edited October 11, 2000).]

11

Pir saab - Jazak Allah

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/hehe.gif

*BTW do u know, that Altaf Hussain (MQM wallay) was also called ‘Pir saheb’ in his day

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/biggrin.gif

Don’t Blame me…
C’est La Vie :slight_smile:

12

first of all i never think i m a great muslim because i m not..but i do like to learn about Islam as much as i can..and bhai jaan if somone prayed with Prophet and heard Prophets voice does not make them muslims either..here is somthing interesting
i m sorry its kinda long
[2. The disagreement between Fatimah and Abu Bakr
The subject is agreed upon by the two parties, and the fair and sensible person has no choice but to judge Abu Bakr as being wrong, that is if he did not admit his injustice and bad treatment of the leading lady.

Anyone who cares to follow the events of that tragedy and studies its various facts will recognize that Abu Bakr deliberately hurt al-Zahra and denied her argument so that she could not protest against him - supported by the texts of al-Ghadir and others - regarding the lawful right for her husband and cousin to the succession of the caliphate. There are many indications that have been mentioned by historians which lead us to believe in accounts of these events, this is one of them:

Al-Zahra - may Allah's peace be upon her - went around the meeting places of al-Ansar, asking for support for her cousin and husband and they said, "O daughter of the Messenger of Allah, we have already acclaimed that man, and if your husband and cousin had approached us before him, we would have supported him." Ali - may Allah honour his face - said, "Would I leave the Messenger of Allah (saw) in his house unburied and go to argue with people about his authority?" Fatimah said, "Abu al-Hasan did what was expected from him, and for what they did Allah will hold them responsible and accountable." [71]

[71]
Tarikh, Qutaybah, vol 1 p 19
Shahrah, Ibn al Hadid
If Abu Bakr was wrong, either unintentionally or through good-will, Fatimah al-Zahara would have persuaded him; but she was angry with him, because he refused to accept her argument and rejected her testimony and the testimony of her husband. She became so angry, she even prevented him in her will from being present at her funeral. When she died, her husband buried her secretly during the night. [72]
[72]
Sahih, Bukhari, vol 3 p 36
Sahih, Muslim, vol 2 p 72
As for her secret burial (as) during the night, it is worth mentioning here, that during my years of research and investigation, I went to al-Medinah to check for myself certain points, then I discovered the following:
Firstly, the grave of al-Zahra is unknown and nobody knows exactly where it is; some say it is in the Prophet's chamber, others say it is in her house opposite the Prophet's chamber, and there are people who think that it might be in al-Baqi', in the midst of Ahl al-Bayt's graves.

This is the first fact that I deduced: al-Zahra (as) wanted the Muslims, through generations to come, to know why she asked her husband to bury her secretly during the night, and that not one of them attend her funeral ! Thus, every Muslim could reach certain interesting facts when researching into historical events.

Secondly, I discovered that the visitor who wants to visit Uthman ibn Affan's grave has to go a long way until he reaches the end of al-Baqi', and there he finds it by a wall. By contrast, he will find the burial places of most of the Companions at the beginning of al-Baqi', near the entry. Even Malik ibn Anas, the famous jurist, who was a follower of the Followers, is buried near the burial places of the Messenger's wives. It became clear to me what the historians meant when they said that he was buried in "Hash Kawkab". which was Jewish land, because the Muslims refused to bury him in the Baqi' of the Messenger of Allah. When Muawiya seized power, he bought that land from the Jews and included it in al-Baqi', so that it contains the grave of his cousin Uthman. He who visits al-Baqi' today will see this fact very clearly.

It is astonishing to know that Fatimah al-Zahra (as) was the first of the Prophet's children to die after him, and at the most there were six months between the departure of the father and his daughter, and despite that, she was not buried beside her father.

Fatimah al-Zahra, as I mentioned earlier, stated in her will that she should be buried secretly, therefore, she was not buried beside her father. But what about her son, al-Hasan, why was he not buried beside his grandfather? Aisha (Umm al-Mumineen) prevented that. When al-Husayn brought his brother to bury him by his grandfather, the Messenger of Allah, Aisha rode a mule and went around saying, "Do not bury someone I do not love in my house." Then, the houses of Bani Umayya and Hashim stood opposite each other ready to fight, but al-Husayn told her that he would only take the coffin of his brother around the grave of their grandfather then he would bury him in al-Baqi'. That was because Imam al-Hasan requested from his brother, that no blood should be shed for his sake. Ibn Abbas said a few verses regarding this event:

"She rode a camel [73], she rode a mule [74], if she had lived longer, she would have ridden an elephant, you have the ninth of the eighth, and you took everything."

[73]
With reference to her mounting the Camel during the War of the Camel.

[74]
With reference to her mounting the mule on the day when she prevented the burial of al Hasan next to his grandfather.
This is another interesting fact: How could Aisha inherit everything, when the Prophet had nine wives? Ibn Abbas transmitted to us: If the Prophet was not to leave any inheritance, and Abu Bakr bore witness to that and prevented al-Zahra from inheriting anything from her father, how then could Aisha? Is there any text which states that the wife could inherit, but not the daughter? Or was it perhaps politics that changed everything, so it denied the daughter everything, and gave the wife everything?
It is worth mentioning here a story related to the subject of inheritance that has been cited by many historians:

Ibn Abi al-Hadid al-Mutazili said in his commentary on Nahj al-Balagha: Aisha and Hafsa came to see Uthman, during his caliphate, and asked him to give them their shares of what they had inherited from the Messenger of Allah (saw). Uthman was stretched on the sofa, so he sat up and said to Aisha: You and that woman sitting next to you brought a man who cleansed himself with his urine and testified that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "We, the prophets, do not leave an inheritance." If the Prophet truly did not leave any inheritance, why do you ask for it now, and if he left an inheritance, why did you deprive Fatimah of her legal share? After that, she left him feeling very angry and said: Kill Na'thal, for he has become an unbeliever. [75]

[75]
Sharh of Nahj al Balagha, Ibn al Hadid, vol 16 p 220-223
3. Ali was more entitled to the leadership
One of the reasons which led to my enlightenment and ultimately made me leave the tradition [Sunna] of my forefathers was the comparison between the positions of Ali ibn Abi Talib and that of Abu Bakr, based on logical deductions and historical references.

As I started in earlier parts of this book, I only included in my research the references which have been agreed on by both, the Shiites and the Sunnis.

I searched in the books of both parties and found that only Ali received total support, and both Shiites and Sunnis agreed on his leadership in accordance with the texts they approved of. However there is neither support nor agreement on the leadership of Abu Bakr except by a small group of Muslims, and we have mentioned what Umar said about his succession to the caliphate. Furthermore. there are many virtues and good deeds attributed to Ali ibn Abi Talib by the Shiites and cited as authentic references in the Sunni books. The sayings are full of the virtues of Ali, more than any other Companion ever received, and even Ahmed ibn Hanbal said: No one among the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) had more virtues than Ali ibn Abi Talib. [76]

[76]
al Mustadrak, al Hakim, vol 3 p 107
al Manaqib, al Khawarizmi, p 3 and 9
Tarikh, Suyuti, p 168
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, Ibn Hajar, p 72
Tarikh, Ibn Asakir, vol 3 p 63
Shawahid at Tanzil, al Haskani al Hanafi, vol 1 p 19
Qadi Ismail, al-Nasa'i and Abu Ali al-Naisaburi said: No Companion had as many virtues attributed to him as Ali. [77]
[77]
al Riyadh al Nazarah, Tabari, vol 2 p 282
al Sawaiq al Muhriqah, p 118, 72

13

Watcher:

Wonderful sentiments.

Quran and Sunnah. Yup, thats the way to go. However, keep in mind that many ayat and ahadith can be interpreted in different ways. So, as suggested by Fraudia (what the heck! get a better nick, yaar

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

), keep in mind that there is a difference between innovation and interpretation. You will have to follow a good scholar of islam who can provide you a complete picture regarding any problem and provide proper islamic evidence for any islamic ruling.

Remember, newer situations may arise in modern times, where you need to take guidance from quran and sunnah in order to solve a contemporary problem, by interpreting the logic behind a rule. There are many examples, but lets not discuss them in this thread. I am happy for you, anyyay.

BTW, I saw all the different posts you had created here on misconceptions etc. Really terrific work. Keep it up.

Adios!

14

I am glad you agree.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

We can discuss this issue in depth some other time Inshallah.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Take Care. I have to go out side for a moment, see you all at night. Bye.
I leave you with this question:

**Why can’t we all Muslims just follow the 5 pillars and with good intentions towards each other UNITE??? Why is this so hard? Why does matters that have passed many many years ago, have to stay like a solid wall in between the unity of Muslims Ummah? **

Oh yeah, I ll post something on this modern times and need of Modern Islam. Inshallah soon.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

V~V~VHe came, He saw, He conqueredV~V~V**

[This message has been edited by The Watcher (edited October 11, 2000).]

15

sherazz uncle:

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Lets for the sake of argument, say that every single word you have said is true and ABSOLUTELY correct, now tell me, whats next? Even if we accept, as you suggest that great injustice was done to Fatima (RA) , and Usman (RA) was burried in jewish graveyard, uncle, what are we trying to accomplish here? I mean, what is the end here? How do you suggest we conclude this excellent debate?

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/wink.gif

Ciao!

16

Watcher !!!

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/smile.gif

Et tu Brutus! You again referred to 5 Pillars!

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/biggrin.gif

Remember, we had a royal rumble in this forum a week ago, when someone objected that Quran does not mention 5 Pillars… ah! those yummy days. I miss them.

Anyway, we should form a “Tamam musalman bhai bhai Forum”, and we will elect you its first President-for-life! How does it sound? Come to think of it, doesn’t it sound sexist

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/biggrin.gif

Lets make it "Tamam musalman bhai behn Forum. Ah, not really! no one will become its member.

http://www3.pak.org/gupshup/smilies/hehe.gif

Any suggestions, yaaro?

Cheers!

17

that just dont be so ignorant

18

To me all those person were humans and humans make mistakes. Hazrat Fatima and Hazrat Abu Bakr were human beings. If they had differences that were just normal wordly things. What did Hazrat Abu Bakr did that was unislamic? Regarding piece of land it was just normal interpretation of law.Do we forget all of Hazrat Abu Bakrs virtues just for few incidences you regard not proper? I think we should leave something for God to do instead of granting status here in this world.

19

degas i have to run but next time i will show u some of his virtues
Bibi Fatima did not die naturally, she was killed..but i will write in detail later

20

ofcourse sheraz was there and he documented the whole episode so he can tell us what happened.

give it up already. a forum is not a place to preach. i forget most of the stuff i read here, unless its worth remembring. what are you trying to do? convert everyone to shia'ism?

think posting a lie will convince us. ?

oh, you did?
hmm what can i say then.