Your ruqya experience.

[iceman]

"Why do you want me to bring the verse which says that the religion has been completed thereby Allah (swt) completing his favor upon us?  If you doubt this Islamic injunction then openly say so and accept your status outside the fold of Islam.  Otherwise, no need for the verse to be brought forward when it is our aqeedah that Islam is complete"

If everything was done and dusted and the book of Allah was sufficient then what was the need for pen and paper. And why did the Prophet s.a.w say "so you don't deviate or go astray after me" or what ever the exact words were,  what was the need for those serious words?

[muslim720]

Discuss the matter. Don't argue to force your opinion or to get me to accept and believe what you want.

Doing just that!  Maybe you can try to be less stupid.

Nobody said he didn't do anything.

He did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request, in other words, he was just as guilty as you make Umar (ra) out to be.

He did what he thought was necessary. He acted as an Imam of the people and not as an individual or one of the people.

If he thought silence and not presenting the pen and paper to be necessary then you, along with millions of Shias, should also adopt the same stance.  And maybe like shut up!

Like I said learn and get to know about Shia Imamah rather then just banging on based on arrogance.

I only refute ideas that are forced into the Qur'an; I don't learn about them.  Having said that, you claim to follow Imam Ali (ra) but you won't shut up regarding an incident during which he said or did NOTHING!

It's not my judgement but an actual fact. The Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper, for who? So he may write something important for those present, why and what for? So they do not DEVIATE or go ASTRAY. If I'm correct these two words are used.

So what do you think the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write?

I also hope you know that the Holy Prophet (saw) lived another three days!  I am providing context with the intention that you would not make a fool out of yourself but you insist on being an idiot.

If the book of Allah was SUFFICIENT then why didn't the Prophet s.a.w know that. And what was the need for the Prophet s.a.w to ask for a pen and paper. WHY did the Prophet s.a.w think that despite the Qur'an, his companions would DEVIATE, GO ASTRAY. What did the Prophet s.a.w see and witness for him to ask for pen and paper and give a clear reason for why he was going to write.

Those questions are for you to answer.  You are the claimant accusing Umar (ra) of disobeying the Holy Prophet (saw) and not allowing him to write something after which we would not "deviate" or "go astray".

Go ahead, tell us!

😊 I didn't accuse Umar. He put himself in it by making his intentions clear 😊

Ignoring your display of faggotry (excessive use of smileys), Imam Ali (ra) put himself in the very same situation by remaining silent.  I will let you decide if Imam Ali (ra) was subdued or he actually was siding with Umar (ra).  Either way, you lose!

The pen and paper was asked for a reason. The Prophet s.a.w had seen, noticed and witnessed something. So the ones who were uncomfortable and uneasy, they were the ones who the Prophet s.a.w asked to bring a pen and paper to keep them in line. There was no need for Ali to bring it. If the problem was seen and noticed in Ali or any other then the Prophet s.a.w surely and most certainly would have asked him or them.

This is like saying that the warden asked the death row inmate to go purchase lethal injection with which the latter could be put to death.

Wallaahi, I have not met a bigger idiot than you.  I think you need to study, or reform your own thoughts on, your core belief which is Imamah.

The Imam (ra) is there to guide but when people (allegedly) choose misguidance, he is not supposed to implement corrective course of action?!?!?!  You are an idiot!

Why should Ali bring the pen and paper when he wasn't the one needing assurance.

So the "infallible" Imam (ra) was subdued to allow ignorance and misguidance to flourish?  Logic!

The ones who were showing signs of difference (deviation, going astray) were the ones who were asked. And their objection and argument exposed them and their intentions.

So you are saying that the Holy Prophet (saw) requested pen and paper to expose those who were "deviants" and "going astray", naudhubillah?  In that case, you need to establish - with unambiguous proof - this intent of the Holy Prophet (saw) and what he wished to write.  Until you prove what he wanted to write, everything else is speculation, including what you think the Holy Prophet (saw) would have ordered to be written down.

If everything was done and dusted and the book of Allah was sufficient then what was the need for pen and paper. And why did the Prophet s.a.w say "so you don't deviate or go astray after me" or what ever the exact words were,  what was the need for those serious words?

Few days ago, you wanted the punishment for Malik bin Nuwayrah from the Qur'an and now you are holding the phrase "so you don't deviate or go astray" above the Qur'anic injunction that the religion has been completed?  I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you.

Returning to you point, you are insisting that something extremely important, something that would have prevented us from "deviating" and "going astray", was prevented from being dictated and was not written down.  In the absence of this information (which was prevented from being written), it must follow that all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray" because it was never written down nor was it conveyed to anyone.

So where is your assurance to salvation because your interpretation can only lead to one conclusion - all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray"?

Unless you prove to us that the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate Imam Ali's (ra) successorship, you are admitting that in the absence of what was intended to be written, you are a deviant and have gone astray.  And all Shias suffer the same fate because they share the same view on this narration as you.

[iceman]

Doing just that!  Maybe you can try to be less stupid.

He did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request, in other words, he was just as guilty as you make Umar (ra) out to be.

If he thought silence and not presenting the pen and paper to be necessary then you, along with millions of Shias, should also adopt the same stance.  And maybe like shut up!

I only refute ideas that are forced into the Qur'an; I don't learn about them.  Having said that, you claim to follow Imam Ali (ra) but you won't shut up regarding an incident during which he said or did NOTHING!

So what do you think the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write?

I also hope you know that the Holy Prophet (saw) lived another three days!  I am providing context with the intention that you would not make a fool out of yourself but you insist on being an idiot.

Those questions are for you to answer.  You are the claimant accusing Umar (ra) of disobeying the Holy Prophet (saw) and not allowing him to write something after which we would not "deviate" or "go astray".

Go ahead, tell us!

Ignoring your display of faggotry (excessive use of smileys), Imam Ali (ra) put himself in the very same situation by remaining silent.  I will let you decide if Imam Ali (ra) was subdued or he actually was siding with Umar (ra).  Either way, you lose!

This is like saying that the warden asked the death row inmate to go purchase lethal injection with which the latter could be put to death.

Wallaahi, I have not met a bigger idiot than you.  I think you need to study, or reform your own thoughts on, your core belief which is Imamah.

The Imam (ra) is there to guide but when people (allegedly) choose misguidance, he is not supposed to implement corrective course of action?!?!?!  You are an idiot!

So the "infallible" Imam (ra) was subdued to allow ignorance and misguidance to flourish?  Logic!

So you are saying that the Holy Prophet (saw) requested pen and paper to expose those who were "deviants" and "going astray", naudhubillah?  In that case, you need to establish - with unambiguous proof - this intent of the Holy Prophet (saw) and what he wished to write.  Until you prove what he wanted to write, everything else is speculation, including what you think the Holy Prophet (saw) would have ordered to be written down.

Few days ago, you wanted the punishment for Malik bin Nuwayrah from the Qur'an and now you are holding the phrase "so you don't deviate or go astray" above the Qur'anic injunction that the religion has been completed?  I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you.

Returning to you point, you are insisting that something extremely important, something that would have prevented us from "deviating" and "going astray", was prevented from being dictated and was not written down.  In the absence of this information (which was prevented from being written), it must follow that all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray" because it was never written down nor was it conveyed to anyone.

So where is your assurance to salvation because your interpretation can only lead to one conclusion - all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray"?

Unless you prove to us that the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate Imam Ali's (ra) successorship, you are admitting that in the absence of what was intended to be written, you are a deviant and have gone astray.  And all Shias suffer the same fate because they share the same view on this narration as you.

All you're doing is coming out with insulting remarks and sarcastic statements. If not that then counter arguments and questions. Why don't you answer what is asked and address what is put forward. I'm talking about the pen and paper incident and how and why Umar spoke. No one else responded in objection  apart from Umar. Was it not Umar apart from everyone else who spoke in response?.

Or is that an accusation on Umar as well. This is what we're discussing. And you're getting personal by picking on Ali. I'm not getting personal. You can pick on who ever you like. I don't own Ali. For me they're all companions of the Prophet s.a.w. that's exactly how I see them.

[iceman]

The Holy Prophet (s) requests that writing materials be brought to him. This is what we read in Sahih al-Bukhari as narrated by Ibn 'Abbas:

"When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was 'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said:

"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray."

'Umar said:

"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us."

The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said,

"Come near so that Allah's Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray,"

while the others said what 'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them,

"Go away and leave me."

Ibn 'Abbas used to say,

"It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah's Apostle from writing a statement for them".

Sahih al Bukhari Arabic-English Volume 9 hadith number 468 and Volume 7 hadith 573

NOTE THE PROPHET'S WORDS,

"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray."

Where else did the Prophet s.a.w use these exact words,

"you will never go astray."

Lets take a look.

"I have left with you something, which if you strictly adhere to, you shall never go astray–The Book of Allah and my progeny.”

Take a look at the exact words used here,

"you shall never go astray"

See the similarity. But Sunni Scholars have considered this hadith weak. Just to confuse things and to divert attention.

[iceman]

NOTE THE PROPHET'S WORDS,

"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray."

Where else did the Prophet s.a.w use these exact words,

"you will never go astray."

Lets take a look.

"I have left with you something, which if you strictly adhere to, you shall never go astray–The Book of Allah and my progeny.”

Take a look at the exact words used here,

"you shall never go astray"

See the similarity. But Sunni Scholars have considered this hadith weak. Just to confuse things and to divert attention.

"This version has been narrated in Sunan Tirmidhi and is classed as Dhaeef (weak). Even though Imam Tirmidhi included it in his book, he himself did not consider it Sahih (authentic) and referred to it as Ghareeb (i.e. strange in its content and not widely recognized). A similar version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn can be found in Musnad Ahmad, but it too is classed as Dhaeef"

I wonder why when the exact words were used in the pen and paper incident.?

[iceman]

Doing just that!  Maybe you can try to be less stupid.

He did not fulfill the Holy Prophet's (saw) request, in other words, he was just as guilty as you make Umar (ra) out to be.

If he thought silence and not presenting the pen and paper to be necessary then you, along with millions of Shias, should also adopt the same stance.  And maybe like shut up!

I only refute ideas that are forced into the Qur'an; I don't learn about them.  Having said that, you claim to follow Imam Ali (ra) but you won't shut up regarding an incident during which he said or did NOTHING!

So what do you think the Holy Prophet (saw) intended to write?

I also hope you know that the Holy Prophet (saw) lived another three days!  I am providing context with the intention that you would not make a fool out of yourself but you insist on being an idiot.

Those questions are for you to answer.  You are the claimant accusing Umar (ra) of disobeying the Holy Prophet (saw) and not allowing him to write something after which we would not "deviate" or "go astray".

Go ahead, tell us!

Ignoring your display of faggotry (excessive use of smileys), Imam Ali (ra) put himself in the very same situation by remaining silent.  I will let you decide if Imam Ali (ra) was subdued or he actually was siding with Umar (ra).  Either way, you lose!

This is like saying that the warden asked the death row inmate to go purchase lethal injection with which the latter could be put to death.

Wallaahi, I have not met a bigger idiot than you.  I think you need to study, or reform your own thoughts on, your core belief which is Imamah.

The Imam (ra) is there to guide but when people (allegedly) choose misguidance, he is not supposed to implement corrective course of action?!?!?!  You are an idiot!

So the "infallible" Imam (ra) was subdued to allow ignorance and misguidance to flourish?  Logic!

So you are saying that the Holy Prophet (saw) requested pen and paper to expose those who were "deviants" and "going astray", naudhubillah?  In that case, you need to establish - with unambiguous proof - this intent of the Holy Prophet (saw) and what he wished to write.  Until you prove what he wanted to write, everything else is speculation, including what you think the Holy Prophet (saw) would have ordered to be written down.

Few days ago, you wanted the punishment for Malik bin Nuwayrah from the Qur'an and now you are holding the phrase "so you don't deviate or go astray" above the Qur'anic injunction that the religion has been completed?  I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you.

Returning to you point, you are insisting that something extremely important, something that would have prevented us from "deviating" and "going astray", was prevented from being dictated and was not written down.  In the absence of this information (which was prevented from being written), it must follow that all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray" because it was never written down nor was it conveyed to anyone.

So where is your assurance to salvation because your interpretation can only lead to one conclusion - all Muslims have "deviated" and "gone astray"?

Unless you prove to us that the Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate Imam Ali's (ra) successorship, you are admitting that in the absence of what was intended to be written, you are a deviant and have gone astray.  And all Shias suffer the same fate because they share the same view on this narration as you.

"I am convinced that the worst munaafiq at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) would be deemed as an upright and principled Muslim compared to you"

I don't care the slightest what you think or say about me. Surely you must know that by now. And your absolutely right, according to the Ahle Sunnah the worst munaafiqs at the time of the Holy Prophet (saw) are considered as upright and principled Muslims 😊

[muslim720]

All you're doing is coming out with insulting remarks and sarcastic statements.

No, I am refuting you and then criticizing you for your stupidity.

If not that then counter arguments and questions.

Not only that, I have exposed your hypocrisy.  In the matter of Malik bin Nuwayrah, you disregarded the words of your own "infallible" Imam (ra) - belonging to the category of Second Weighty Thing which is on par with the Qur'an (as per your beliefs) - and demanded Qur'anic proof.  However, in this case, you are satisfied with a statement occurring in Sahih Bukhari over what the Qur'an says - that the religion has been completed thereby implying that all that our salvation rests upon has been spelled out.

I'm talking about the pen and paper incident and how and why Umar spoke. No one else responded in objection  apart from Umar. Was it not Umar apart from everyone else who spoke in response?.

Umar's (ra) response was not objection but reaction; he reacted to the Holy Prophet (saw) falling unconscious right after he made the request.  Even if we agree that it was an objection - for argument's sake - why was the "infallible" Imam (ra) a bystander?  And if you repeat that the "infallible" Imam (ra) acted as needed, don't you think that weakens his position and therefore his existence?  Why have an "infallible" Imam (ra) who has control over atoms but is too timid to implement corrective course of action?

You will never answer these questions in a logical line flowing from one to the next.

Or is that an accusation on Umar as well. This is what we're discussing. And you're getting personal by picking on Ali.

Picking on Imam Ali (ra)?  I am showing you that the one you consider hujjah upheld, or at the very least did not oppose, Umar's (ra) decision.  Now is a good time, since its not too late, for you to follow your hujjah on issues like this one, Fadak, naming your children Abu Bakr and Umar, etc!

However, the main point I am trying to establish now is the following: if the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would prevent us from becoming "deviated" and having "gone astray", it means that we are missing that critical piece of information or prescription.  Therefore, we must conclude that Muslims have all "deviated" and "gone astray", including the Shias. 

Going a step further, since only Shias hold the belief that the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing the prescription, the judgment applies only to them.  Hence, only the Shias have "deviated" and "gone astray" (since they are the only ones to claim that the prescription to avoid the ills of having "deviated" and "gone astray" was prevented from being written down).

Until you prove (with authentic proof) what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate for the Sahaba (ra) to write down, we can conclude that the Shias are the only ones to have "deviated" and "gone astray" because only they claim that the prescription was never written down and they cannot authentically establish what that prescription would have said (had it been written down).

[iceman]

No, I am refuting you and then criticizing you for your stupidity.

Not only that, I have exposed your hypocrisy.  In the matter of Malik bin Nuwayrah, you disregarded the words of your own "infallible" Imam (ra) - belonging to the category of Second Weighty Thing which is on par with the Qur'an (as per your beliefs) - and demanded Qur'anic proof.  However, in this case, you are satisfied with a statement occurring in Sahih Bukhari over what the Qur'an says - that the religion has been completed thereby implying that all that our salvation rests upon has been spelled out.

Umar's (ra) response was not objection but reaction; he reacted to the Holy Prophet (saw) falling unconscious right after he made the request.  Even if we agree that it was an objection - for argument's sake - why was the "infallible" Imam (ra) a bystander?  And if you repeat that the "infallible" Imam (ra) acted as needed, don't you think that weakens his position and therefore his existence?  Why have an "infallible" Imam (ra) who has control over atoms but is too timid to implement corrective course of action?

You will never answer these questions in a logical line flowing from one to the next.

Picking on Imam Ali (ra)?  I am showing you that the one you consider hujjah upheld, or at the very least did not oppose, Umar's (ra) decision.  Now is a good time, since its not too late, for you to follow your hujjah on issues like this one, Fadak, naming your children Abu Bakr and Umar, etc!

However, the main point I am trying to establish now is the following: if the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would prevent us from becoming "deviated" and having "gone astray", it means that we are missing that critical piece of information or prescription.  Therefore, we must conclude that Muslims have all "deviated" and "gone astray", including the Shias. 

Going a step further, since only Shias hold the belief that the Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing the prescription, the judgment applies only to them.  Hence, only the Shias have "deviated" and "gone astray" (since they are the only ones to claim that the prescription to avoid the ills of having "deviated" and "gone astray" was prevented from being written down).

Until you prove (with authentic proof) what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate for the Sahaba (ra) to write down, we can conclude that the Shias are the only ones to have "deviated" and "gone astray" because only they claim that the prescription was never written down and they cannot authentically establish what that prescription would have said (had it been written down).

"Until you prove (with authentic proof) what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate for the Sahaba (ra) to write down, we can conclude that the Shias are the only ones to have "deviated" and "gone astray" because only they claim that the prescription was never written down and they cannot authentically establish what that prescription would have said (had it been written down)"

The proof is right in front of you, the Prophet's s.a.w words on why he wanted pen and paper,  "so I may right something that you do not go astray or deviate" What ever it was certainly wouldn't have let the companions go astray or deviate. No need for any twist or turns or gimmicks or games. The companions deviated, went astray. Simple as that.

"Not only that, I have exposed your hypocrisy.  In the matter of Malik bin Nuwayrah"

Read your own books, the reports aren't clear regarding the case of Malik. Innocent until proven guilty. And even if he turns out to be guilty then that surely proves companions can turn back on their heels by deviating, going astray, apostasy etc. You lose this case either way. It's your DOUBLE STANDARDS in every matter.  You have no principle in place to go by. That is what your faith and belief is all about.

"No, I am refuting you and then criticizing you for your stupidity"

Your only trying to survive in this discussion by twist and turns.

"you disregarded the words of your own infallible Imam"

I'm challenging you to prove a general principle from the Qur'an. That is if you refuse to pay Zakah to the ruler of the time then you're subject to capital punishment by beheading.

"religion has been completed"

How was the religion completed. What made the religion complete. What happened on that particular day that before this day the religion wasn't complete.

"Umar's (ra) response was not objection but reaction; he reacted to the Holy Prophet (saw) falling unconscious right after he made the request."

Excuses. How long are you going to be dishonest with yourself. And what will this dishonesty earn you. 70 virgins in Jannah probably. He clearly objected and caused a fuss over it. That's how determined he was. And his second statement made it clear that he knew what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write. Otherwise he never would have said "we have the book of Allah with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us". Why did he say this if he didn't know.

"why was the "infallible" Imam (ra) a bystander?"

He wasn't. Look at the facts.

"And if you repeat that the "infallible" Imam (ra) acted as needed, don't you think that weakens his position and therefore his existence?"

Just because Imams don't do what we want and think that they should do or should have done doesn't weaken their position. 

"Why have an "infallible" Imam (ra) who has control over atoms but is too timid to implement corrective course of action?"

You believe that violence and threatening behaviour is the corrective course of action. Might and strength and the use it by force is right, that's what you believe in.

"You will never answer these questions in a logical line flowing from one to the next"

I'm doing it and have always done it. The Prophet s.a.w wanted to write something so that the companions do not deviate, go astray. Now the companions didn’t care. They didn't think it was necessary. So why should the Prophet s.a.w care. The doctor wants to right something for you so that you don't fall ill. If you think it's not necessary then why should the doc bother.

"Picking on Imam Ali (ra)?  I am showing you that the one you consider hujjah upheld, or at the very least did not oppose, Umar's (ra) decision."

Not only Ali but also others opposed Umar. Some sided with Umar and some opposed. Never the less why is it called a BLACK DAY.

Muslims along with the companions have deviated, gone astray. According to the prophet saw, not me.

[muslim720]

The proof is right in front of you, the Prophet's s.a.w words on why he wanted pen and paper,  "so I may right something that you do not go astray or deviate" What ever it was certainly wouldn't have let the companions go astray or deviate. No need for any twist or turns or gimmicks or games. The companions deviated, went astray. Simple as that.

Ignoring the rest of your filth - usually less is more with people like yourself - I have to conclude (from inference) that Shias have deviated and gone astray.  I will re-visit my argument and draw a conclusion all based on what Shias consider to be "facts".

1.  The Holy Prophet (saw) wanted to dictate something after which no Muslim would deviate or go astray.

2.  This prescription was not written.  Allegedly, Umar (ra) prevented the Holy Prophet (saw) from spelling it out.

3.  In the absence of this prescription, we must conclude that Muslims have deviated and gone astray thereby failing the mission of the Holy Prophet (saw) but this is a different discussion altogether.

From the above points, we can make this last inference:

1.  Only the Shias believe that the prescription which would have saved us from deviating and going astray was not written down.

2.  Shias do not have any irrefutable proof which can ascertain what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to write down.  In other words, Shias have no authentic report as to what the prescription would state.

3.  Therefore, Shias - as per their own belief (that such a monumental prescription was not written down) - must admit that they are misguided given that they have no authentic evidence to ascertain what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate.

He wasn't. Look at the facts.

Let me re-visit the facts.  Hmmm, let's see!  The Prophet (saw) asked for pen and paper.  Umar (ra) [allegedly] prevented everyone from bringing pen and paper.  Imam Ali (ra) also did not bring pen and paper.  That, to me, screams "BYSTANDER"!

[iceman]

"Ignoring the rest of your filth"

FILTH is what comes out of you. And your posts are always full of it. FILTH is how you see and view the Shia faith and community. FILTH is your attitude and behaviour towards Shias. That's exactly what FILTH is. You don't have a single post which is free from sarcastic remarks and personal insults. That's what FILTH is.

"I have to conclude (from inference) that Shias have deviated and gone astray"

The Prophet s.a.w didn't say to us that "fetch me a pen and paper so that I may write for you something that you don't deviate, go astray" those he addressed deviated and went astray. So you stick to what you conclude by your opinion. And we stick to what we conclude by what the Prophet s.a.w said. The matters clear and I know it's killing you.

"I will re-visit my argument and draw a conclusion all based on what Shias consider to be "facts".

Why do you go by what Shias consider. Go by facts based on what was said and happened.

1, The Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper. Important question WHY? Well he wasn't well and it was clear that these were his final days. So every person is asked by Allah as well as his Prophet s.a.w to write a WILL. To sort out important matters (property, finance, belongings etc) by writing a WILL.

2, Who did he ask to fetch him a pen and paper? Those present? Or specific people? And what reason did the Prophet s.a.w himself give for demanding pen and paper? "So I may write something for you so that you don't deviate or go astray".

3, Well the book of Allah is with the Muslims. Islam has been completed, Allah has full filled his favours upon the Muslims and he has chosen Islam as there religion (faith and belief). So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?

4, Who was the Prophet s.a.w speaking to? The Muslims? The Ummah? Exactly who? The COMPANIONS, that's who. Well one thing is clear that despite Islam being completed, favours being full filled and the book of Allah being present it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate. And that is the companions above all who were actually the ones being spoken to and addressed.

5, What was the reply? From who? Well the ones Muhammad s.a.w was addressing. Umar apart from anyone else objected. WHY, because according to certain individuals he believed that the Prophet s.a.w shouldn't be burdened with such responsibility especially the state that he is in.

6, What did Umar say? "We have the book of Allah with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us". He is clearly reminding the others about the book of Allah. Why? Only one thing comes out of this and that is to make it out to the others that there is no need for anything else and we don't need anything else since we have the book. Him saying "the book of Allah is sufficient for us" clearly shows that what the Prophet s.a.w was going to write and offer is undermined.

7, Why did Umar object. Why didn't he remain silent. Because he didn't want to burden the Prophet s.a.w with such a responsebility. Well if that was the case and Umar's intentions then this clearly tells that this was something important and necessary. Otherwise the words  responsibility and burden in the state of illness wouldn't have been used.

8, Do people not ask wills to be written and give instructions when they know there time is up. It's a common practice. Infact

[iceman]

8, Do people not ask wills to be written and give instructions when they know there time is up. It's a common practice. Infact did Abu Bakr not address the matter of who was going to succeed him when he was ill and his time was up. Why didn't anyone object to Abu Bakr's decision of Umar succeeding him that Abu Bakr shouldn't be burdened with such responsibility in the state of illness.

9, What about Umar himself, when he was attacked and injured and became serious ill by that injury that he decided on who will succeed him by arranging a committee, why didn't Umar remind himself that he shouldn't burden himself with such responsibility when he himself is seriously ill.

10, The matter is crystal clear that the Prophet s.a.w wanted to write something so that the people don't deviate, go astray. This loyal companion should have shown his loyalty by honouring the Prophet s.a.w and not by objecting. And Should not have caused a fuss over the Prophet s.a.w full filling his will or desire.

11, After all this was no ordinary individual but infact it was Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. And Muhammad s.a.w didn't want his Ummah, especially the companions who he was addressing directly at the time, to deviate and go astray after him.

12, Those who defend Umar and those who sided with him so vigorously even knowing the facts are cheating their conscious and for what. I wonder what they're going to be getting out of this. 70 promised virgins in heaven may be 😊

[muslim720]

3, Well the book of Allah is with the Muslims. Islam has been completed, Allah has full filled his favours upon the Muslims and he has chosen Islam as there religion (faith and belief). So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?

4, Who was the Prophet s.a.w speaking to? The Muslims? The Ummah? Exactly who? The COMPANIONS, that's who. Well one thing is clear that despite Islam being completed, favours being full filled and the book of Allah being present it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate. And that is the companions above all who were actually the ones being spoken to and addressed.

Again, ignoring the rest of your filth, I would like to point out your contradiction in two back-to-back points that should otherwise logically follow.  You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate" and then you said, "it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate".

Make up your mind!  Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray?

Having said that, I will re-state my main argument after quoting you.  You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?"

It is for you to not only define but also prove what that "important something, apart from the Book of Allah" was without which we can safely assume that Shias have gone astray and are deviants since they (Shias) are the only ones to believe that Umar (ra) prevented a critical piece of our aqeedah from being written down.  Either you define what that "important something" was with backing evidence to prove that that's exactly what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate OR you must admit that you all (Shias) are deviants by the same premises you set forth.

[iceman]

Again, ignoring the rest of your filth, I would like to point out your contradiction in two back-to-back points that should otherwise logically follow.  You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate" and then you said, "it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate".

Make up your mind!  Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray?

Having said that, I will re-state my main argument after quoting you.  You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?"

It is for you to not only define but also prove what that "important something, apart from the Book of Allah" was without which we can safely assume that Shias have gone astray and are deviants since they (Shias) are the only ones to believe that Umar (ra) prevented a critical piece of our aqeedah from being written down.  Either you define what that "important something" was with backing evidence to prove that that's exactly what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate OR you must admit that you all (Shias) are deviants by the same premises you set forth.

"Make up your mind!  Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray"

USE YOUR HEAD. This ain't kindergarten. Who was the Prophet s.a.w addressing? Muslims. Which Muslims? Those he was surrounded by. The companions obviously. Unless you want to distinguish between Muslims and companions. Who were the early Muslims or the first Muslims who accepted Muhammad s.a.w for what he was and what he had to offer? Obviously companions. It was the same people Muhammad s.a.w was addressing.

The prescription was for them whom he was addressing. It's not all of the Muslims, every single was or is subject to deviation. Those deviated at the time. And those who side and support those who deviated by defending and protecting them are also subject to deviation. I know what you're trying to do. You're doing your best to find a loophole to divert attention from Umar and those who sided with him. Because he and they are under scrutiny here.

[muslim720]

USE YOUR HEAD. This ain't kindergarten. Who was the Prophet s.a.w addressing? Muslims. Which Muslims? Those he was surrounded by. The companions obviously.

The prescription was for them whom he was addressing. It's not all of the Muslims, every single was or is subject to deviation.

So the Holy Prophet (saw) was addressing Muslims that were surrounding him.  No problem!  Watch how your premise backfires.

If the prescription was for those surrounding the Holy Prophet (saw), that means it was also for Imam Ali (ra).  Therefor, in the absence of the prescription being written down, you have to now face a bigger humiliation and admit that Imam Ali (ra) also deviated and went astray - naudhubillah thumma naudhubillah!

See how big of an idiot you are!  In your quest to malign others, you paint an equally ugly picture of Imam Ali (ra).

[iceman]

Again, ignoring the rest of your filth, I would like to point out your contradiction in two back-to-back points that should otherwise logically follow.  You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate" and then you said, "it was clear that despite all that Muslims could still deviate".

Make up your mind!  Was the prescription to prevent the Companions (ra) or all the Muslims from deviating and going astray?

Having said that, I will re-state my main argument after quoting you.  You said, "So what was that important something, apart from the book of Allah, so the companions don't deviate?"

It is for you to not only define but also prove what that "important something, apart from the Book of Allah" was without which we can safely assume that Shias have gone astray and are deviants since they (Shias) are the only ones to believe that Umar (ra) prevented a critical piece of our aqeedah from being written down.  Either you define what that "important something" was with backing evidence to prove that that's exactly what the Holy Prophet (saw) wished to dictate OR you must admit that you all (Shias) are deviants by the same premises you set forth.

Again you are trying to twist and turn things around. You're looking for loopholes to try and draw attention away from those who objected and were the cause of an argument. Why don't you stick to the facts and just look at what's said.

What exactly did the Prophet s.a.w say? He asked for a pen and paper. WHY? The Prophet's s.a.w words "so you don't deviate". So the Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper because he wanted to write something for those who were present that they don't deviate. Again the Prophet's s.a.w exact words not mine which are agreed on.

Let leave Umar out of this because mentioning him is what's causing you to be upset and therefore dishonest. Did the Prophet s.a.w write what was needed to be written? The answer is yes or no. And the obvious answer would be no. So without that document those present deviated or were subject to deviation.

Otherwise we are accusing the Prophet of talking meaningless or less important and worthy if we take away the weight and importance from the matter. It's as simple as that. But because Umar objected and told otherwise by saying that "we have the book of Allah with us, the book of Allah is sufficient for us"

and was the cause of argument and fuss, so the whole issue from your side is protecting and defending Umar and his reputation. I believe that we should leave Umar out of this for you to think rational and with an open mind.

[iceman]

So the Holy Prophet (saw) was addressing Muslims that were surrounding him.  No problem!  Watch how your premise backfires.

If the prescription was for those surrounding the Holy Prophet (saw), that means it was also for Imam Ali (ra).  Therefor, in the absence of the prescription being written down, you have to now face a bigger humiliation and admit that Imam Ali (ra) also deviated and went astray - naudhubillah thumma naudhubillah!

See how big of an idiot you are!  In your quest to malign others, you paint an equally ugly picture of Imam Ali (ra).

"So the Holy Prophet (saw) was addressing Muslims that were surrounding him.  No problem!"

Well if you disagree then who was the Prophet s.a.w addressing by asking for a pen and paper and by saying that "that I may write something for you so you do not  deviate"?

"If the prescription was for those surrounding the Holy Prophet (saw), that means it was also for Imam Ali (ra)"

Absolutely. And for all the Muslims who were present and surrounding the Prophet s.a.w.

"Therefor, in the absence of the prescription being written down, you have to now face a bigger humiliation and admit that Imam Ali (ra) also deviated and went astray"

This is where you've either got it totally wrong or are trying to technically twist it around to divert attention. A father has nine children. For him they are all the same. He his dying and on his death bed. And he asks for pen and paper so he may write something so his kids don't deviate after him.

Although the book of Allah is present and should be sufficient because inheritance laws and how inheritance should be distributed is there. But still the father wants to write something so his kids don't deviate despite inheritance laws bring clear.

Now if one kid turns around and says that "we shouldn't burden our father with such responsibility especially in the state that he is in, also remember that we have the book of Allah in which inheritance laws are clear, that is sufficient for us or should be sufficient for us".

From here certain kids believe that the father should be given pen and paper and should be allowed to write what he thinks is necessary and important. Others side with the one who thinks we shouldn't.

Then after the death and onwards the kids fall in to disagreement over the inheritance and the matter of difference and disagreement comes between the children and even the grandchildren. Then who has deviated and who hasn't or who has gone astray and who hasn't can be discussed and looked into.

But it would be foolish to say all deviated and went astray.

[muslim720]

This is where you've either got it totally wrong or are trying to technically twist it around to divert attention.

No, this is where I begin twisting your arm and you are in agony.

A father has nine children. For him they are all the same. He his dying and on his death bed. And he asks for pen and paper so he may write something so his kids don't deviate after him.

I don't care about your hypothetical scenarios.  I am twisting your arm on your own premise.  If the prescription was for everyone, it includes Imam Ali (ra).

But still the father wants to write something so his kids don't deviate despite inheritance laws bring clear.

Includes Imam Ali (ra)!

Now if one kid turns around and says that "we shouldn't burden our father with such responsibility especially in the state that he is in, also remember that we have the book of Allah in which inheritance laws are clear, that is sufficient for us or should be sufficient for us".

From here certain kids believe that the father should be given pen and paper and should be allowed to write what he thinks is necessary and important. Others side with the one who thinks we shouldn't.

Does not matter who sided with who and what!  Imam Ali (ra), as per your own premise, cannot be excluded from the possibility of deviating and going astray in the absence of the prescription (which was not written down).

Then after the death and onwards the kids fall in to disagreement over the inheritance and the matter of difference and disagreement comes between the children and even the grandchildren. Then who has deviated and who hasn't or who has gone astray and who hasn't can be discussed and looked into.

But it would be foolish to say all deviated and went astray.

Cool story!  Still does not exclude Imam Ali (ra).

[muslim720]

You're looking for loopholes to try and draw attention away from those who objected and were the cause of an argument.

I am looking for holes in your argument.  The pathetic thing about every Shia belief in opposition to Sunnis is that they actually contradict one or more other Shia beliefs.

What exactly did the Prophet s.a.w say? He asked for a pen and paper. WHY? The Prophet's s.a.w words "so you don't deviate". So the Prophet s.a.w asked for a pen and paper because he wanted to write something for those who were present that they don't deviate.

For those who were present which includes Imam Ali (ra).  Try as hard as you want, you cannot shut down the argument that Imam Ali (ra) was prone to deviating and going astray (naudhubillah), if we accept your premise.

Did the Prophet s.a.w write what was needed to be written? The answer is yes or no. And the obvious answer would be no. So without that document those present deviated or were subject to deviation.

Yes, the document was not written so without it, those present could have deviated including Imam Ali (ra).

Otherwise we are accusing the Prophet of talking meaningless or less important and worthy if we take away the weight and importance from the matter.

I agree with you (to dig your hole deeper).  The Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would have prevented those present from deviating and going astray.  Now tell us how did Imam Ali (ra) - since he was also present - avoid deviation and going astray?  After all, Imam Ali (ra), too, was deprived from this knowledge (that would have prevented those present from deviation and going astray).

I believe that we should leave Umar out of this for you to think rational and with an open mind.

Umar (ra) is already out of this discussion.  Prove to me that Imam Ali (ra), in the light of your premise and understanding of this hadith, did not deviate and go astray after being kept away from such a crucial prescription.

[iceman]

No, this is where I begin twisting your arm and you are in agony.

I don't care about your hypothetical scenarios.  I am twisting your arm on your own premise.  If the prescription was for everyone, it includes Imam Ali (ra).

Includes Imam Ali (ra)!

Does not matter who sided with who and what!  Imam Ali (ra), as per your own premise, cannot be excluded from the possibility of deviating and going astray in the absence of the prescription (which was not written down).

Cool story!  Still does not exclude Imam Ali (ra).

"No, this is where I begin twisting your arm and you are in agony"

Keep fantasising. What have you got to lose.

"I don't care about your hypothetical scenarios"

The world doesn't evolve around you.

"I am twisting your arm on your own premise"

Your twisting and turning just to divert attention.

"If the prescription was for everyone, it includes Imam Ali (ra)"

Ok, then you need to prove that Ali deviated and how.

"Cool story"

I know, it's silenced you. But not your arrogance and stubbornness.

[iceman]

I am looking for holes in your argument.  The pathetic thing about every Shia belief in opposition to Sunnis is that they actually contradict one or more other Shia beliefs.

For those who were present which includes Imam Ali (ra).  Try as hard as you want, you cannot shut down the argument that Imam Ali (ra) was prone to deviating and going astray (naudhubillah), if we accept your premise.

Yes, the document was not written so without it, those present could have deviated including Imam Ali (ra).

I agree with you (to dig your hole deeper).  The Holy Prophet (saw) was prevented from writing something which would have prevented those present from deviating and going astray.  Now tell us how did Imam Ali (ra) - since he was also present - avoid deviation and going astray?  After all, Imam Ali (ra), too, was deprived from this knowledge (that would have prevented those present from deviation and going astray).

Umar (ra) is already out of this discussion.  Prove to me that Imam Ali (ra), in the light of your premise and understanding of this hadith, did not deviate and go astray after being kept away from such a crucial prescription.

"I am looking for holes in your argument.  The pathetic thing about every Shia belief in opposition to Sunnis is that they actually contradict one or more other Shia beliefs"

It doesn't matter what we're discussing or what ever the subject is, certain Sunnis always have double standards in just about everything.

"For those who were present which includes Imam Ali (ra).  Try as hard as you want, you cannot shut down the argument that Imam Ali (ra) was prone to deviating and going astray (naudhubillah), if we accept your premise"

Prove to me that Ali went astray and how? You can't even build the courage to admit and say that Umar objected and even opposed the Prophet s.a.w. despite the matter being clear. He raised his voice in the presence of the Prophet s.a.w and was the cause of a loud and noisy argument. He caused division in front of the Prophet s.a.w and in his presence, forget about what he got upto after the demise of the Prophet s.a.w. Have the courage to admit and accept what is wrong and those who have wronged.

"Yes, the document was not written so without it, those present could have deviated"

Not 'could have deviated" but 'did deviate'. The words of the Prophet s.a.w were "so you don't deviate". Not "so you might not deviate". Clear difference pal.