TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => General Sunni-Shia => Topic started by: Ahlus_sunnah on April 26, 2016, 01:06:52 PM
-
ibn abdulbirr said in al istiab
إن السلف اختلفوا في تفضيل أبي بكر و علي رضي الله تعالى عنهما, وإن سلمان وأبا ذر والمقداد والخباب و جابرا وأبا سعيد الخدري وزيد بن أرقم رضي الله تعالى عنهم فضلوا علياً على غيره, وقالوا: هو أول من أسلم
plz explain this for me
-
I don't accept empty statements without proof akhi. Ibn Abd Al Barr would struggle to find one reference for the above, let alone proof for all.
-
Based on the above, he's saying 7 people out of 100,000+ Sahabah preferred Ali over anyone else.
I would say, as above, there's bearly any evidence for this, maybe Ammar only but not the others.
Ali preferred Abu Bakr over himself.
-
Ahlus-Sunnah have an Ijmaa' that Abu-Bakr and Umar رضي الله عنهم are loved more by the Prophet than Sayyidna Ali رضي الله عنه.
And this is what Imam Malik said, and Al-Laith Ibn Saad, and Imam Abu-Hanifa, and Imam Sufyan al-Thawry, and others.
والله أعلم
-
Based on the above, he's saying 7 people out of 100,000+ Sahabah preferred Ali over anyone else.
I would say, as above, there's bearly any evidence for this, maybe Ammar only but not the others.
100,000 sahaba? We had a number that big? Unless you factor in that a sahabi does not have to be pious.
Ali preferred Abu Bakr over himself.
The interpretation of that hadith is that he was being humble.
-
100,000 sahaba? We had a number that big? Unless you factor in that a sahabi does not have to be pious.
Consider atleast the Muhajireen and Ansar, regardless of their numbers.
The interpretation of that hadith is that he was being humble.
This is invalid interpretation, which has been explained to you several times, and each time you chose to skip that explanation.
Here you go again:
1. This argument is illogical because the interpretation of humbleness would have been valid, if the questioner would have asked Ali(ra) about superiority ALONG with the OPTIONS. Like whom does Ali(ra) consider to be the best of people after Prophet(saw), Whether Abubakr or Umar or Ali. If this would have been the case then the interpretation that the reply of Ali(ra) was out of humbleness would have been considerable, but in the narration of Sahi Bukhari, we don't find that Ali(ra) was given any Choice, such as, whether he considers himself superior or Abubakr(ra) superior or not. His son just asked him that who were the best people after prophet(saw), WITHOUT ANY Choices given to him. Even then Ali(ra) named Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra).
2. Further we notice that, Ali(ra) didn’t name any other companion. If he was being humble then he(ra) should have said that all sahaba are at same level. We find Ali(ra) specifically naming Abubakr and Umar.
3.Why did Ali(ra) differentiate between Abubakr and Umar ? If he was being humble, then he should have applied the same rule towards Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra), that both were at same level, but he said after Prophet(Saw) Abubaklr is the best and then after him, Umar.
-
I think the first two are A LOT better than the second two, no comparison.
-
If we think with shia mindset (twelvers or not), its possible that Sunni would think zayd ibn haritha RA is a lot better than Ali RA considering how close and how much Rasulullah shallallahu alaihi wasallam loved him and his son usama RA, even tho theyre not blood related. If shia is consistent, they shud say zayd ra was an imam too.
-
This is invalid interpretation, which has been explained to you several times, and each time you chose to skip that explanation.
Where has its explained to me several times? Please provide the links.
1. This argument is illogical because the interpretation of humbleness would have been valid, if the questioner would have asked Ali(ra) about superiority ALONG with the OPTIONS. Like whom does Ali(ra) consider to be the best of people after Prophet(saw), Whether Abubakr or Umar or Ali. If this would have been the case then the interpretation that the reply of Ali(ra) was out of humbleness would have been considerable, but in the narration of Sahi Bukhari, we don't find that Ali(ra) was given any Choice, such as, whether he considers himself superior or Abubakr(ra) superior or not. His son just asked him that who were the best people after prophet(saw), WITHOUT ANY Choices given to him. Even then Ali(ra) named Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra).
There are narrations where Abi Bakr said I am not the best among you. Likewise this is similar.
There are even narrations where Umar says I wish I had merits which Ali had.
2. Further we notice that, Ali(ra) didn’t name any other companion. If he was being humble then he(ra) should have said that all sahaba are at same level. We find Ali(ra) specifically naming Abubakr and Umar.
That would illogical if he said all are at the same level. These were companions who accepted Islam at the toughest times.
3.Why did Ali(ra) differentiate between Abubakr and Umar ? If he was being humble, then he should have applied the same rule towards Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra), that both were at same level, but he said after Prophet(Saw) Abubaklr is the best and then after him, Umar.
There is a difference between them. We all know this. Abi Bakr was much superior in knowledge and he accepted Islam way before Umar. Umar on the contrary was a better ruler.
-
If we think with shia mindset (twelvers or not), its possible that Sunni would think zayd ibn haritha RA is a lot better than Ali RA considering how close and how much Rasulullah shallallahu alaihi wasallam loved him and his son usama RA, even tho theyre not blood related. If shia is consistent, they shud say zayd ra was an imam too.
In the Sunni belief there is proof that Fatima (sa) is superior to Ali (as), but this can't be proven from the 12er Shia sources.
-
What Abu Bakr said was out of humbleness because a pious believer would not assume he is the best man on earth, proof is he never named anybody. If he had named Fulan and Fulan were better than him then we'd have to take his words literally as we did with `Ali.
`Ali wished he died with `Umar's deeds.
-
This is invalid interpretation, which has been explained to you several times, and each time you chose to skip that explanation.
Where has its explained to me several times? Please provide the links.
It was if you are brother Abdaal.
1. This argument is illogical because the interpretation of humbleness would have been valid, if the questioner would have asked Ali(ra) about superiority ALONG with the OPTIONS. Like whom does Ali(ra) consider to be the best of people after Prophet(saw), Whether Abubakr or Umar or Ali. If this would have been the case then the interpretation that the reply of Ali(ra) was out of humbleness would have been considerable, but in the narration of Sahi Bukhari, we don't find that Ali(ra) was given any Choice, such as, whether he considers himself superior or Abubakr(ra) superior or not. His son just asked him that who were the best people after prophet(saw), WITHOUT ANY Choices given to him. Even then Ali(ra) named Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra).
There are narrations where Abi Bakr said I am not the best among you. Likewise this is similar.
There are even narrations where Umar says I wish I had merits which Ali had.
Again, you missed the gist of the point I made. My argument is that, the questioner never gave any options to Ali(RA). He didn't ask whether you are superior or Abu Bakr & Umar. Rather it was a general question, yet out of all the Muhajireen and Ansar, Ali(RA) named Abu bakr and then Umar. This is a clear proof that he wasn't being humble.
As for the example you gave about Abu bakr, then you see the difference in these two incidents... Abu bakr(RA) doesn't says I'm not the best FROM SOME OF YOU. OR I'm not the best from ONE OF YOU. Rather he makes it general, which shows it was out of Humbleness. Whereas, ALi(RA) restricts it to individuals.
As for the example of Umar(RA), then it isn't a clear evidence of superiority.
2. Further we notice that, Ali(ra) didn’t name any other companion. If he was being humble then he(ra) should have said that all sahaba are at same level. We find Ali(ra) specifically naming Abubakr and Umar.
That would illogical if he said all are at the same level. These were companions who accepted Islam at the toughest times.
You missed the point. If he was being humble, then he would have said so, instead of naming two people out of hundreds of Muhajireen n Ansar.
3.Why did Ali(ra) differentiate between Abubakr and Umar ? If he was being humble, then he should have applied the same rule towards Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra), that both were at same level, but he said after Prophet(Saw) Abubaklr is the best and then after him, Umar.
There is a difference between them. We all know this. Abi Bakr was much superior in knowledge and he accepted Islam way before Umar. Umar on the contrary was a better ruler.
That's true, which shows that Ali(RA) wasn't being humble, but rather straight forward. If he was answering as being humble, he wouldn't have said Abu bakr then Umar.
-
What about the whole ahadith where Ali concludes he is only an ordinary person?
-
`Ali wished he died with `Umar's deeds.
No surprise there. Umar didn't face any internal opposition, and due to this his Caliphate was the best in terms of progress.
Imagine you die in a state where you manage to improve someone social conditions, and with this improved social condition that person became a better Muslim.
-
No surprise there. Umar didn't face any internal opposition, and due to this his Caliphate was the best in terms of progress.
Imagine you die in a state where you manage to improve someone social conditions, and with this improved social condition that person became a better Muslim.
`Ali didn't know at the time his reign was going to be that bad. This strengthens the value of his praise for `Umar.
What about the whole ahadith where Ali concludes he is only an ordinary person?
He says "I am a man from the Muslims." This part although is a correct statement, yet it hints towards him being humble and shows he disliked to praise himself or speak of his special status. Although he did do that a lot during the Fitnah for political reasons.
-
`Ali didn't know at the time his reign was going to be that bad. This strengthens the value of his praise for `Umar.
I am leaning toward the opinion he was told about it, just like the Prophet (pbuh) spoke about what Hussain will experience.
In fact recall the Prophecy of Al Hassan. This son of mine is a syed and he will bring peace between two groups.
He says "I am a man from the Muslims." This part although is a correct statement, yet it hints towards him being humble and shows he disliked to praise himself or speak of his special status. Although he did do that a lot during the Fitnah for political reasons.
Even Imam Zain al Abideen's dua were famous when he used to repent.
-
What about the whole ahadith where Ali concludes he is only an ordinary person?
Yes, when it comes to stating his own position, then he was being humble. But him stating his own position out of humbleness, doesn't negate the fact that, the first two positions he mentioned were literal and a straight forward response, because of the reasons explained to you. What adds weight to this is that, the questioner, was AFRAID, he would say Uthman as third. So why to fear, if he was just being humble, listing the first two positions?
Had Ali been straight forward while answering his own position, then he would have said fourth position. Wallahu alam.
-
Salaam.
I agree with the position that Imam Ali (a.s) was being humble in not preferring himself to others. All Muslims believe that our Prophet - Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w.) to be the Leader of All Prophets (a.s) and to be superior to all Prophets (a.s) but Prophet Mohammed (s.a.w.w) said following about himself (s.a.w.w) regarding Superiority:
01. Prophet Yunus (a.s)
Sahih Bukhari
Volume 6, Book 60, Number 127:
Narrated Abdullah:
The Prophet said, "None has the right to say that I am better than Jonah bin Matta."
Sahih Bukhari
Volume 6, Book 60, Number 128:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "Whoever says that I am better than Jonah bin Matta, is a liar."
02. Prophet Musa (a.s)
Sahih Bukhari
Hadith no: 601
Narrated / Authority of: Abu Huraira
Two persons, a Muslim and a Jew, quarrelled. The Muslim said, "By Him Who gave Muhammad superiority over all the people! The Jew said, "By Him Who gave Moses superiority over all the people!" At that the Muslim raised his hand and slapped the Jew on the face. The Jew went to the Prophet (SAW) and informed him of what had happened between him and the Muslim. The Prophet (SAW) sent for the Muslim and asked him about it. The Muslim informed him of the event. The Prophet (SAW) said, "Do not give me superiority over Moses, for on the Day of Resurrection all the people will fall unconscious and I will be one of them, but I will. be the first to gain consciousness, and will see Moses standing and holding the side of the Throne (of Allah). I will not know whether (Moses) has also fallen unconscious and got up before me, or Allah has exempted him from that stroke."
Sahih Bukhari
Hadith no: 602
Narrated / Authority of: Abu Said Al-Khudri
While Allah's Apostle (SAW) was sitting, a Jew came and said, "O Abul Qasim! One of your companions has slapped me on my face." The Prophet (SAW) asked who that was. He replied that he was one of the Ansar. The Prophet (SAW) sent for him, and on his arrival, he asked him whether he had beaten the Jew. He (replied in the affirmative and) said, "I heard him taking an oath in the market saying, 'By Him Who gave Musa (Moses) superiority over all the human beings.' I said, 'O wicked man! (Has Allah given Musa superiority) even over Muhammad (SAW) I became furious and slapped him over his face." The Prophet (SAW) said, "Do not give a prophet superiority over another, for on the Day of Resurrection all the people will fall unconscious and I will be the first to emerge from the earth, and will see Musa (Moses) standing and holding one of the legs of the Throne. I will not know whether Musa (Moses) has fallen unconscious or the first unconsciousness was sufficient for him."
So we can see from these hadiths that it is better to avoid such topics. Prophets (a.s) and Righteous People (r.a) never consider themselves superior to others due to their humility and humbleness.
-
While I agree with brother Ijtaba that such topics must be avoided and that it is ridiculously childish to even discuss this, YET don't forget we are dealing with Twelver Shia who are the most childish and ridiculous group out there, it is this group's favorite hobby to compare people's virtues, strengths, merits, deeds etc... just to boast that their favorite is greater than all our favorites.
So when dealing with kids you will have to go to their level sometimes unfortunately...
Therefore, this statement by the Prophet (saw):
"Do not give a prophet superiority over another"
Is unlike `Ali's statement when he heard some men insult Abu Bakr and `Umar, he climbed the pulpit and said:
"The best of people after the Prophet (saw) passed away were Abu Bakr and then `Umar."
While I believe `Ali is humble, and he wouldn't boast in the case that he actually was best, yet I firmly believe he meant every word he said.
Similarly, when Abu Bakr wished for `Umar to accept the Caliphate, `Umar refused it telling him that he deserves it more: "Abu Bakr is the best of us, I cannot lead people when Abu Bakr is in their midst."
I don't think this is humbleness, he actually meant what he said.
So now let's talk about humbleness and modesty, a big part of humbleness is actually admitting that others are in fact superior to you, a humble man is not necessarily a man who keeps saying others are better if they aren't, a humble man is also an honest man who admits his faults and inferiority.
-
I have dealt with a lot of those traditions based on which some scholars concluded there were ikhtilaf among companions about tafzeel.
https://islamistruth.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/answering-arguments-against-the-superiority-of-abu-bakr-and-umar/
To claim that Ali was being humble when he preferred Abu Bakr and Umar over himself is wrong. A humble man would say “I am not best” or “I am an ordinary person” but he would never say “This and this person is best after This person”. Why Ali didn't say Jafar was best or Abbas was best or Ali was best??? Because his statement was a verdict on the Minbar not a saying of a humble person.
-
I don't even understand how `Ali can be better than Abu Bakr, the man embraced Islam without question while being in his thirties or late twenties, he had a wife and family, he had an important status in society and a lot to lose. `Ali embraced Islam as a boy around seven or eight per my research and per the popular opinion as well (he died at 58 at the year 40, do the math) he was living off of the Prophet (saw) and residing in his house. Abu Bakr spent his wealth on Islam and freed slaves and helped convert many of the major Islamic personalities to Islam. `Ali had nothing to offer at the time and he hid his Islam while Abu Bakr was the first to announce his Islam publicly. Abu Bakr defended the Prophet (saw) when the pagans assaulted him and got beaten up more than once for doing so, he had no weapons nor an army behind him. Abu Bakr risked his own family's life by ordering them to help the Prophet (saw) escape Makkah. `Ali was under the protection of his strong tribe. While Abu Bakr served as the companion and right hand man of the Prophet (saw), `Ali was maturing and became a strong warrior whose main contribution was on the battle fields, Allah even instructed the Prophet (saw) to consult Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr with a known weakness in his body still participated in battle and fought valiantly. The Prophet (saw) appointed Abu Bakr to lead armies, he appointed him as the first man to lead the Muslims to Hajj and teach them the rites and he appointed him to lead the prayer of the Muslims in his final days. When the Prophet (saw) died it was Abu Bakr who addressed the Muslims and handled the situation, it was he who calmed them down, it was he who instructed them on how to pray Janazah and how to bury the Prophet (saw), it was Abu Bakr who stopped the Fitnah that could have happened between the Muhajiroun and the Ansar, while `Ali did nothing except stay with his relatives in Fatimah's house. When he as a Caliph, Abu Bakr was the first man to collect the Qur'an, not `Ali as they falsely claim. Abu Bakr established the religious state officially and defended it from its enemies at a sensitive time when it was weak and the situation was chaotic. Abu Bakr only had three women and died not leaving much wealth, while `Ali had many wives (Fatimah, Khawla, Umamah, Umm al Banin, Layla, Asma', Umm Habib, Mukhbi'ah, Umm Sa`id) and a long list of mothers of children (nineteen female servants who bore him many kids) as well as vast lands (check his Will in Sunni and Shia books).
-
I don't even understand how `Ali can be better than Abu Bakr, the man embraced Islam without question while being in his thirties or late twenties, he had a wife and family, he had an important status in society and a lot to lose. `Ali embraced Islam as a boy around seven or eight per my research and per the popular opinion as well (he died at 58 at the year 40, do the math) he was living off of the Prophet (saw) and residing in his house. Abu Bakr spent his wealth on Islam and freed slaves and helped convert many of the major Islamic personalities to Islam. `Ali had nothing to offer at the time and he hid his Islam while Abu Bakr was the first to announce his Islam publicly. Abu Bakr defended the Prophet (saw) when the pagans assaulted him and got beaten up more than once for doing so, he had no weapons nor an army behind him. Abu Bakr risked his own family's life by ordering them to help the Prophet (saw) escape Makkah. `Ali was under the protection of his strong tribe. While Abu Bakr served as the companion and right hand man of the Prophet (saw), `Ali was maturing and became a strong warrior whose main contribution was on the battle fields, Allah even instructed the Prophet (saw) to consult Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr with a known weakness in his body still participated in battle and fought valiantly. The Prophet (saw) appointed Abu Bakr to lead armies, he appointed him as the first man to lead the Muslims to Hajj and teach them the rites and he appointed him to lead the prayer of the Muslims in his final days. When the Prophet (saw) died it was Abu Bakr who addressed the Muslims and handled the situation, it was he who calmed them down, it was he who instructed them on how to pray Janazah and how to bury the Prophet (saw), it was Abu Bakr who stopped the Fitnah that could have happened between the Muhajiroun and the Ansar, while `Ali did nothing except stay with his relatives in Fatimah's house. When he as a Caliph, Abu Bakr was the first man to collect the Qur'an, not `Ali as they falsely claim. Abu Bakr established the religious state officially and defended it from its enemies at a sensitive time when it was weak and the situation was chaotic. Abu Bakr only had three women and died not leaving much wealth, while `Ali had many wives (Fatimah, Khawla, Umamah, Umm al Banin, Layla, Asma', Umm Habib, Mukhbi'ah, Umm Sa`id) and a long list of mothers of children (nineteen female servants who bore him many kids) as well as vast lands (check his Will in Sunni and Shia books).
+1
Well said! There is no doubt about the superiority of Abubakr over the rest of the Sahaba including Ali. No one's contribution to Islam can be compared to Abubakr's from the early Makkan period to his last days in Madina.
-
I don't even understand how `Ali can be better than Abu Bakr, the man embraced Islam without question while being in his thirties or late twenties, he had a wife and family, he had an important status in society and a lot to lose. `Ali embraced Islam as a boy around seven or eight per my research and per the popular opinion as well (he died at 58 at the year 40, do the math) he was living off of the Prophet (saw) and residing in his house. Abu Bakr spent his wealth on Islam and freed slaves and helped convert many of the major Islamic personalities to Islam.
Indeed Abi Bakr's contributions were great, but to compare the two is like comparing apples to oranges. Just because Ali didn't have wealth and maturity at the time, doesn't mean we should conclude therefore, he had nothing to give.
Who is the one who prepared dinner for the Qurash when the Prophet was inviting the people to Islam in the beginning? Who is the one who stood up when the Prophet (pbuh) asked his family about the support?
`Ali had nothing to offer at the time and he hid his Islam while Abu Bakr was the first to announce his Islam publicly.
Not sure where you got this. Please provide details where Ali hid his Islam.
Abu Bakr defended the Prophet (saw) when the pagans assaulted him and got beaten up more than once for doing so, he had no weapons nor an army behind him. Abu Bakr risked his own family's life by ordering them to help the Prophet (saw) escape Makkah.
Who risked his life to sleep in the Prophet (pbuh) bed at that time/ When the boycott occurred against the Hashim tribe, and Khatijah spend her saving to save the Muslims, it was Ali who used to travel and get food etc. At this time Abi Bakr was gone to safety.
While Abu Bakr served as the companion and right hand man of the Prophet (saw), `Ali was maturing and became a strong warrior whose main contribution was on the battle fields, Allah even instructed the Prophet (saw) to consult Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr with a known weakness in his body still participated in battle and fought valiantly. The Prophet (saw) appointed Abu Bakr to lead armies, he appointed him as the first man to lead the Muslims to Hajj and teach them the rites and he appointed him to lead the prayer of the Muslims in his final days.
Who spread Islam in Yemen. Today there is a mosque named after Ali due to his presence.
When the Prophet (saw) died it was Abu Bakr who addressed the Muslims and handled the situation, it was he who calmed them down, it was he who instructed them on how to pray Janazah and how to bury the Prophet (saw), it was Abu Bakr who stopped the Fitnah that could have happened between the Muhajiroun and the Ansar, while `Ali did nothing except stay with his relatives in Fatimah's house.
Its not the whole story. Ali himself wanted the lead role for Caliphate but he was to busy with the burial while Saqifa occurred.
Abu Bakr only had three women and died not leaving much wealth, while `Ali had many wives (Fatimah, Khawla, Umamah, Umm al Banin, Layla, Asma', Umm Habib, Mukhbi'ah, Umm Sa`id) and a long list of mothers of children (nineteen female servants who bore him many kids) as well as vast lands (check his Will in Sunni and Shia books).
I don't understand how this counts as superiority.
-
((Who is the one who prepared dinner for the Qurash when the Prophet was inviting the people to Islam in the beginning? Who is the one who stood up when the Prophet (pbuh) asked his family about the support?))
Oh he cooked dinner? That's not even remotely important, our mothers and wives cook dinner all the time, doesn't grant them superiority over pious believers. The story itself is false and inaccurate in my opinion, I don't believe in it nor does it make sense altogether, add on top that there's no reason for `Ali to even respond since the question was addressed at the pagan relatives of Muhammad (saw) not at `Ali who was a Muslim at the time.
((Who risked his life to sleep in the Prophet (pbuh) bed at that time/ When the boycott occurred against the Hashim tribe, and Khatijah spend her saving to save the Muslims, it was Ali who used to travel and get food etc. At this time Abi Bakr was gone to safety.))
I don't believe that he slept in his bed, I didn't find authentic evidence I trust about this incident. As for Khadijah we're not discussing her.
((Who spread Islam in Yemen. Today there is a mosque named after Ali due to his presence. ))
It wasn't `Ali who first spread it there, Islam was already spread before him and the Ash`ari and Dawsi tribes had already embraced it.
((Its not the whole story. Ali himself wanted the lead role for Caliphate but he was to busy with the burial while Saqifa occurred. ))
So what if he was busy with burial preparations? It's the family's duty to prepare for the burial of their dead. If your father or brother passed you'd be preparing for their burial as that's your duty, you don't send strangers to prepare them. Secondly, this event itself needs verification because I recall the correct opinion is that the preparations for the Prophet (saw) began on Tuesday AFTER the Bay`ah, `Ali was not preparing the Prophet (saw) on Monday when Saqifah took place, he and his relatives were gathered at Fatimah's house on Monday.
((I don't understand how this counts as superiority.))
To me this is one of the most important factors related to a man's superiority. A man who was poor then became rich and wealthy after receiving authority is a VERY IMPORTANT FACTOR.
-
I don't believe that he slept in his bed, I didn't find authentic evidence I trust about this incident. As for Khadijah we're not discussing her.
During that boycott against the Prophet (pbuh) and Khatijah's involvement it was Ali who was there to provide tribal support in addition instead of Abi Bakr.
-
May Allah guide Us.
-
Ali (RA) even announced, and reminded everyone during his rein that Abu Bakr (RA), and Umar (RA) are superior to him. This is without a question being posed to him like is the case with his son. This adds weight to the fact that Abu Bakr's (RA) resume of fadhail is unmatched. I believe these narrations are authentic (mutawatir level)?
This is fact is further substantiated by the narration where Ali (RA) even threatens his own retarded people that he'll lash any of them who utters such blasphemy.
-
This is fact is further substantiated by the narration where Ali (RA) even threatens his own retarded people that he'll lash any of them who utters such blasphemy.
Can't be authentic. The Rafidah did not exist in era. They are started emerging a few decades after of Karbala. Even Al Mutkhar was not a Rafidi.
-
This is fact is further substantiated by the narration where Ali (RA) even threatens his own retarded people that he'll lash any of them who utters such blasphemy.
Can't be authentic. The Rafidah did not exist in era. They are started emerging a few decades after of Karbala. Even Al Mutkhar was not a Rafidi.
Yes, it is authentic. according to our Hadith scholars. You can't dismiss something as not authentic just because it doesn't compliment your semi-Rawafidh tendencies. I know the truth hurts, but grow some balls, and accept it on the chin.
The followers of Ali (RA) at the time were Shia politically, and not theologically. They were the Rafidah ancestors, and laid the foundation of Tashayu to go sky-born decades later.
-
Yes, it is authentic. according to our Hadith scholars. You can't dismiss something as not authentic just because it doesn't compliment your semi-Rawafidh tendencies. I know the truth hurts, but grow some balls, and accept it on the chin.
So Ali didn't want to lash Abu Sufyan for making Rafidi claims? Also, who authenticated it?
The followers of Ali (RA) at the time were Shia politically, and not theologically. They were the Rafidah ancestors, and laid the foundation of Tashayu to go sky-born decades later.
No if we read the Quran it says 'No soul shall bear the burden of another's sins.'
-
ibn Hajr (RA) to my knowledge. :)
Abu Sufyan didn't make Rafidhi claims like you, and your fellow side-kicks do. He was still thinking tribalism at the time of the Prophet's (SAW) death, and thus offered him support. He didn't openly declare and announce that Ali (RA) was superior to Abu Bakr (RA) and Umar (RA), but had a grudge against the tribe of Abu Bakr (RA) that was Banu Taim.
The Rafidhi murmurings weren't born, and didn't start to circulate until Ali's (RA) rein, so he had a massive community of retards to deal with who kept barking how Abu Bakr (RA), and Umar (RA) were usurped his right to rule. A completely different dilemma than dealing with single individual. This eventually turned to into a theological deviation after Karbala.
That Qur'anic verse doesn't disapprove the Ahlus Sunnah's stand point how the Shias at the time of Ali's (RA) life never made it a point of theology that he, and the Ahlul Bhayt were the rightful (divine) rulers of Ummah. It was strictly politcal, emotional, and a matter of collective ijtehed by a bunch power hungry lunkheads.
-
ibn Hajr (RA) to my knowledge. :)
He said it based on what claim?
The Rafidhi murmurings weren't born, and didn't start to circulate until Ali's (RA) rein, so he had a massive community of retards to deal with who kept barking how Abu Bakr (RA), and Umar (RA) were usurped his right to rule. A completely different dilemma than dealing with single individual. This eventually turned to into a theological deviation after Karbala.
No I don't believe it existed during Ali's Caliphate.
That Qur'anic verse doesn't disapprove the Ahlus Sunnah's stand point how the Shias at the time of Ali's (RA) life never made it a point of theology that he, and the Ahlul Bhayt were the rightful (divine) rulers of Ummah. It was strictly politcal, emotional, and a matter of collective ijtehed by a bunch power hungry lunkheads.
Non-Sense. The Shias at the time did not believe in divine appointed. This bidah came in later.
-
Based on no claim, but based on Rijal methodology, criteria, and understanding - another daft question.
No one cares what you believe mate, but history, and authentic Hadith literature is saturated with this very undeniable fact. If that doesn't tickle your fancy then feel free to reject just like a typical Rafidhi. Man the irony!
I never said that the retards (Shia of Ali) believed he was divinely appointed. You mis-understood my point. My IS and WAS that the narration that you refuse to accept supports Abu Bakr's (RA) fadhail because of Ali (RA) threatened anyone who was placing him above his master (RA). You see Ali (RA) wasn't dim like his "Shia" because he was there in person when he heard the Ahadiths from the lips of his father in law (SAW) praising Abu Bakr (RA) which, confirms his status is beyond any doubt that he his the BEST person in this Ummah, period.
His "Shia" were too retarded to accept this fact, but to their credit they never cursed him. Those were their successors that came at least a couple of decades later.