Re: The family of Ali KaramAllaho Wajho at the battle of Karbala
okay…good
tht will indeed b very strange but u will have to show me evidence tht Imam named his children after these particular personalities…if I name my child Ahmad then only I cud tell who I have named him after…Ahmad the cricketer, Ahmad the musician, Ahmad the religious leader, do I just like the way it sounds, or do I like its literal meaning?..Imam Ali ibne Hussain named his son Abdul Rahman, so can it be concluded tht he was inspired by the killer of his grandfather, Abdul Rehman ibne Muljim, to name his son that?..so if u have any clear evidence in form of traditions from Imam Ali that can link the reason behind him naming his children then it will be naturally weighed against the evidence tht we already have where he has told which friend of his he has named them after…if there is any evidence from history then u must put it fwd to be examined…
2ndly, when reflecting on history it is a rule of thumb to see facts as per the standards and norms of the particular area under study and not today’s standards and norms…e.g. today when ppl hear someone named Obama then diff person comes to mind whereas 10 years back for us cricket fans at least it wud have been Obama the Kenyan cricket tht wud have come to mind, and 30 years back tht name might have been known for different reasons and characters or might not have been known etc…therefore to analyse history u have to go back to the norms and standards of tht era…
now keeping tht in mind go back to the times of our Imams like al Baqir and as Sadiq and view the names of their disciples in the list of narrators and u will see many yazeeds, muawiyas and marwans…all 3 highly despised characters yet the shia of the time choosing this name out of any name in the world and while professing their dislike of these characters…so clearly the names were not seen exclusively in the shadow of characters of Yazeed ibne Muawiya, Muawiya ibne Abi Sufyan, or Marwan bin Hakam as they r today…so ur assumption has to have historic basis to back it…
no, it was no secret who the Shiyaan e Ali were…there was a sizable minority that acknowledged the command of Rasool Allah regarding Imam Ali’s Imamat and it contained the loyal companions and the banu hashim the family of Rasool Allah whom with command of Allah the message of Islam was revealed to first…
it was the rulers that were scared of those who refused to acknowledge their power and not the other way around…in fact they attacked the tribe of Malik bin nuwayrah and killed him (and khalid b walid raped his wife the same night) because he refuse to acknowledge Abu Bakr as the ruler and said tht he will never hand over collections to Abu Bakr since Rasool Allah never appointed him his Emir…the new rulers dealt with Imam Ali and his followers by putting strict restrictions on them and usurped rights tht were left for them by Rasool Allah such as their khums was halted and their properties confiscated with until them returning to the Ahlay Bayt at a much later time of Umar bin Abdul Aziz…
bro, Imam Ali only once came voluntarily to court of Abu Bakr…and tht was to hand over to him the copy of Quran which he had compiled and it was chronologically with tafsir and taweel but u can read the how Abu Bakr and Umar responsed to tht…here are references from Sunni books if u wish to study their response…
- at-Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa’d, v2, part 2, p101
- Ansab al-ashraf, by al-Baladhuri, v1, p587
- al-Istiab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, v3, pp 973-974
- Sharh Ibn Abi al-Hadid, v6, pp 40-41
- al-Tas’hil, by Ibn Juzzi al-Kalbi, v1, p4
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p166
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, Section 4, p197
- Ma’rifat al-Qurra’ al-kibar, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p32
- Fat’hul Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p386
- al-fihrist, by (Ibn) an-Nadim, p30
- al-Masahif, by Ibn Abi Dawud, p10
- Hilyatul awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p67
- al-Sahibi, by Ibn Faris, p79
- ‘Umdatul Qari, by al-Ayni, v20, p16
- Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, pp 112-113
- Ma’rifat al-Qurra’ al-kibar, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p31
well we take our deen from Rasool Allah and his teaching is tht anybody who professes from his tongue the 2 sentences is a Muslim and has all the rights a Muslim is to be given…anyone who doubts this is a non believer himself since he has rejected the clear command and inunction of the Prophet saww…
Compareatively much worse were those who started first civil war between Muslims and waged war on Imam Ali…and even to those Imam Ali never attributed the term ‘unbelievers’…he used the Quranic terminology to define these three groups tht fought him as Nakisoon, Mariqoon, and Qasitoon and u can look up the meaning of those in the holy Quran and traditions…
In terms of our view of early companions then after the death of the Holy Prophet, a small minority, following Ali, refused to pay allegiance…at the head of the minority there were Salman al Farsi, Abu Dhar al Ghaffari, Miqdad, and Ammar Yasir… at the beginning of the caliphate of Ali also a sizable minority in disagreement refused to pay allegiance…among the most persistent opponents were Saeed ibn Ass, Walid ibn Uqba, Marwan b Hakam, Amr ibn Ass, Busr ibn Artat, Samura ibn Jundab, and Mughira ibn Shubah.
The first group I mentioned above to us is the elite of Sahaba and the later group with their conduct only confirmed wht is in their hearts…u can study the biographies and complete lives from birth of death of both of the groups and u will c what their aims were and where their loyalties were…around these 2 groups we polarize the Sahaba and there is no way to agree with Sunnis tht all 100,000 sahaba are above questioning and must be given immunity …some of them actually quite vigorously worked against the principles and inspirations of Islam…
lol, I think I have done a little more than Yes or No but since its the weekend its ok…