TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => General Sunni-Shia => Topic started by: Qamar Farooq on September 28, 2018, 07:27:11 PM
-
Very Interesting Stuff. It turns out the kufans were the people who were actually responsible
Karbala - Who Killed Hussain (RA)? Part 1
Karbala - Who Killed Hussain (RA)? Part 2
-
Very Interesting Stuff. It turns out the kufans were the people who were actually responsible
Karbala - Who Killed Hussain (RA)? Part 1
Karbala - Who Killed Hussain (RA)? Part 2
Who killed Hussain ra? The men directly responsible were those in authority, Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad and Yazeed ibn Muawiya along with those who were present on the battlefield and drew the swords and launched the offensive.
Kufa was under lock down and kerfew was in place on the orders of the govner Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad. Don't blame the Kufans for the persecution and house arrest certain individuals were under just to take the blame away from the real perpetrators Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad and Yazeed ibn Muawiya.
-
Good videos mashallah I see the truth biting certain Shiites 😂😂😂
-
People of Kufa were not Rafidah at that time. So in reality 12er Shia did not even exist.
-
It's not a secret. While Yazid and his appointed governor Ibn Ziyad were overall in charge and bear much of the blame, the actual forces on the ground were the people of Kufa, most of whom were formerly part of the Shi'a movement having allegiance to Amir ul-Mu'minin Ali رضى الله عنه. Who were Umar b. Sa'd and Shimr b. Dhi al-Jawshan? They were basically Kufan ex-Shi'a. The people who suddenly abandoned Muslim b. Aqil رضى الله عنه in the thousands were present in large numbers in Karbala.
-
Good videos mashallah I see the truth biting certain Shiites 😂😂😂
Not at all. Your thoughts based on fantasy doesn't bother anyone. 😊
-
It's not a secret. While Yazid and his appointed governor Ibn Ziyad were overall in charge and bear much of the blame, the actual forces on the ground were the people of Kufa, most of whom were formerly part of the Shi'a movement having allegiance to Amir ul-Mu'minin Ali رضى الله عنه. Who were Umar b. Sa'd and Shimr b. Dhi al-Jawshan? They were basically Kufan ex-Shi'a. The people who suddenly abandoned Muslim b. Aqil رضى الله عنه in the thousands were present in large numbers in Karbala.
Political Shia, yes but not religious Shia. Because Shia means follower. And it was a general term at the time and that's how it was used such As Shia Muawiya and Shia Ali.
-
Not at all. Your thoughts based on fantasy doesn't bother anyone. 😊
Your divine Imamate crap is fantasy you still cannot provide CLEAR proofs😂😂😂
12 divine beings is a fantasy that only 2 ruled the rest were cowering in taqyyia mode😂😂😂😂
Your sect is a fantasy thought up by ibn saba 😂😂😂😂😂
Reality of saqifa beats the fantasy of divine imamates😂👍😂😂
Eshiite fantasy 😂😂😂
-
People of Kufa were not Rafidah at that time. So in reality 12er Shia did not even exist.
Shia did exist be it political or those who considered Ali as successor to Muhammad s.a.w. On the other hand you've probably forgotten to mention that Sunnis or Ahle Sunah Wal Jama'ah didn't exist till many years to come. I don't know why you didn't mention this.😑
-
Political Shia, yes but not religious Shia. Because Shia means follower. And it was a general term at the time and that's how it was used such As Shia Muawiya and Shia Ali.
Yes, the point is the killers of sayyidina Husain رضى الله عنه were the people of Kufa, they were Kufans, as the title says. And you previously wrote "Don't blame the Kufans".
-
Yes, the point is the killers of sayyidina Husain رضى الله عنه were the people of Kufa, they were Kufans, as the title says. And you previously wrote "Don't blame the Kufans".
The governor of Kufa was replaced by ibn Ziyaad, why? Who was ibn Ziyaad and where did he come from to Kufa with an armed convoy? And what makes you say the killers of Hussain were the people of Kufa? The Muslim army under the command of Ibn Ziyaad were Kufans? Tell me more!
-
The governor of Kufa was replaced by ibn Ziyaad, why? Who was ibn Ziyaad and where did he come from to Kufa with an armed convoy? And what makes you say the killers of Hussain were the people of Kufa? The Muslim army under the command of Ibn Ziyaad were Kufans? Tell me more!
Yes they were! Do you think Umar b. Saad, Shimr, and Shabath b. Rabi and the vast majority of those who were on the battlefield came from Syria? Ibn Ziyad basically bribed the Kufan Shiites to betray Ahl al-Bayt. The Syrians themselves didn't have the manpower to maintain rule over Kufa and Iraq, they needed collaborators. By the way, who were responsible for betraying Muslim bin Aqil رضى الله عنه and then killing him as well? Remember EIGHTEEN THOUSAND Kufans gave the bay'ah to sayyidina Husain through the agency of Muslim bin Aqil رضى الله عنهما. You think the Syrians had the manpower to suppress 18,000 people by force? They had to be bribed. It was a betrayal of the worst kind. In their letters to sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه the Kufans said that ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND of the people of Kufa were with him. Where were these 100 thousand people?
-
Yes they were! Do you think Umar b. Saad, Shimr, and Shabath b. Rabi and the vast majority of those who were on the battlefield came from Syria? Ibn Ziyad basically bribed the Kufan Shiites to betray Ahl al-Bayt. The Syrians themselves didn't have the manpower to maintain rule over Kufa and Iraq, they needed collaborators. By the way, who were responsible for betraying Muslim bin Aqil رضى الله عنه and then killing him as well? Remember EIGHTEEN THOUSAND Kufans gave the bay'ah to sayyidina Husain through the agency of Muslim bin Aqil رضى الله عنهما. You think the Syrians had the manpower to suppress 18,000 people by force? They had to be bribed. It was a betrayal of the worst kind. In their letters to sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه the Kufans said that ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND of the people of Kufa were with him. Where were these 100 thousand people?
And why did they write to Hussain in Madinah to begin with? What was the reason and purpose?
-
When sayyidina Husayn received the news of the martyrdom of Muslim bin Aqil, Hani bin Urwah, and his envoy Abdallah bin Yuqtur: "He took out a written statement to the people and read it to them: 'In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate, dreadful news of the murder of Muslim b. Aqil, Hani b. Urwah and Abdallah b. Yuqtur has reached us. OUR SHI'AH HAS DESERTED US. Those of you who would prefer to leave us may leave freely without guilt." The people began to disperse from him to the right and left. The only followers left with him were those who had come with him from Medina." (History of Tabari v.19 p.89)
-
And why did they write to Hussain in Madinah to begin with? What was the reason and purpose?
They were his Shi'ah, duh?
That's why sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه said after he got the news of the martyrdom of Muslim b. Aqil and Hani b. Urwa: "OUR SHI'AH HAVE DESERTED US" Read my previous post
-
They were his Shi'ah, duh?
That's why sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه said after he got the news of the martyrdom of Muslim b. Aqil and Hani b. Urwa: "OUR SHI'AH HAVE DESERTED US" Read my previous post
So when and how all of a sudden did they become Shia? And when they deserted Hussain who's Shia did they become? Or did they all of a sudden become Sunnis?
-
So when and how all of a sudden did they become Shia? And when they deserted Hussain who's Shia did they become? Or did they all of a sudden become Sunnis?
They were Shia. In fact, after the martyrdom of sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه, they felt guilty that some of them had participated in his killing and others had abandoned him. That's how the Tawwabun movement got started leading to the battle of Ayn al Warda. Tawwabun means they wanted to make Tawbah... Tawbah from what? From killing or abandoning sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه whom they wrote letters to inviting him to be their Imam in Kufah, pledging their allegiance to him in the tens of thousands, but then became cowards, betrayed him, abandoned him and accepted bribes from Ibn Ziyad to join the army that killed him in Karbala.
-
They were Shia. In fact, after the martyrdom of sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه, they felt guilty that some of them had participated in his killing and others had abandoned him. That's how the Tawwabun movement got started leading to the battle of Ayn al Warda. Tawwabun means they wanted to make Tawbah... Tawbah from what? From killing or abandoning sayyidina Husayn رضى الله عنه whom they wrote letters to inviting him to be their Imam in Kufah, pledging their allegiance to him in the tens of thousands, but then became cowards, betrayed him, abandoned him and accepted bribes from Ibn Ziyad to join the army that killed him in Karbala.
They were Shia or did they become Shia? And what kind of Shia did they become? Isna Ashar didn't exist at the time and neither did the Ismailis/Shash Imami. So what kind of Shia were they? I'm not asking you about the Tawabun movement, all this came about later.
Lets look at the basics and facts. Why did the Kufans write to Hussain? What seemed to be the reason and cause? Was there a problem? You have Yazeed ibn Muawiya the sixth Caliph of the Muslims. You had a government in place. There was no civil war and the Ummah wasn't left with out a ruler. So who exactly were these Kufans and why did they write to Hussain?
This is what you need to answer and talk about.
-
They were Shia or did they become Shia? And what kind of Shia did they become? Isna Ashar didn't exist at the time and neither did the Ismailis/Shash Imami. So what kind of Shia were they? I'm not asking you about the Tawabun movement, all this came about later.
Lets look at the basics and facts. Why did the Kufans write to Hussain? What seemed to be the reason and cause? Was there a problem? You have Yazeed ibn Muawiya the sixth Caliph of the Muslims. You had a government in place. There was no civil war and the Ummah wasn't left with out a ruler. So who exactly were these Kufans and why did they write to Hussain?
This is what you need to answer and talk about.
This is all outside the scope of our discussion and off topic. The point is, as I have proven, that the people who betrayed Imam Husayn عليه السلام والرضوان and participated en masse in his killing were the people of Kufah, the Shiite movement who would later evolve to become the various Shiite theological groups like Fivers, Seveners, Twelvers, etc.
-
This is all outside the scope of our discussion and off topic. The point is, as I have proven, that the people who betrayed Imam Husayn عليه السلام والرضوان and participated en masse in his killing were the people of Kufah, the Shiite movement who would later evolve to become the various Shiite theological groups like Fivers, Seveners, Twelvers, etc.
"This is all outside the scope of our discussion and off topic"
What an absolute joke. You haven’t proven anything. You're too scared to discuss.
-
The Kufans didn’t really kill him. Rather they lured him to his death. Shimr is the murderer, under the direction of Ubaydallah ibn Ziyad, may Allah give them what they deserve.
-
The Kufans didn’t really kill him. Rather they lured him to his death. Shimr is the murderer, under the direction of Ubaydallah ibn Ziyad, may Allah give them what they deserve.
And who was Shimr? Did he come from Damascus? He was a Kufan!
In fact, Shimr was one of the original Shiites, he faught alongside Amir ul Muminin RA in Siffin
-
And who was Shimr? Did he come from Damascus? He was a Kufan!
In fact, Shimr was one of the original Shiites, he faught alongside Amir ul Muminin RA in Siffin
Was it an armed convey that killed Hussain under the command of Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad or was it a Shia rebel group? And what happened to the prisoners and where were they taken?
You've given one example of Shimr. There were people like him who joined those sides who were strong and durable. There were Muslims as such who became Shia this then Shia that where the authority and power lied. And obviously the most important questions which you don't want to touch.
People have been trying to hijack this situation and use it to their advantage to try and show that it was Shias who did this, then Shias did that and the other. As though Shias were responsible for everything that went wrong. 😊
But the question they need to ask themselves is where was the Muslims especially the Sahaba and the tabe'een? Or were there any Sunnis around and where were they.
-
But the question they need to ask themselves is where was the Muslims especially the Sahaba and the tabe'een? Or were there any Sunnis around and where were they.
Imam Husayn عليه السلام والرضوان was a Sunni, ironically murdered by Shiites of Kufah.
-
Imam Husayn عليه السلام والرضوان was a Sunni, ironically murdered by Shiites of Kufah.
You have just messed his head up with that statement of truth now watch how many counter questions are coming your way😊👍
-
Imam Husayn عليه السلام والرضوان was a Sunni, ironically murdered by Shiites of Kufah.
😊 And Sunni? OK, which Sunni? Hanafi, Maliki, Shafa'ee or may be Hanbali? 😊 Murdered by Shias of Kufah? OK, where exactly were the Sunnis hiding at the time? May be they were all on holiday in Barbados 😊
"You have just messed his head up with that statement of truth now watch how many counter questions are coming your way😊"
No counter questions from me. I know you're already frightened out of your..... Don't want to scare you any further incase you don't sleep well. 😀
-
😊 And Sunni? OK, which Sunni? Hanafi, Maliki, Shafa'ee or may be Hanbali? 😊 Murdered by Shias of Kufah? OK, where exactly were the Sunnis hiding at the time? May be they were all on holiday in Barbados 😊
The Sunnis were getting massacred at Karbala at that time, as I already explained.
Sayyidina Imam Husayn عليه السلام والرضوان was a Sunni meaning an adherent of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaah.
Hanafi, Maliki, Shafie, Hanbali are schools of jurisprudence (not theological sects) which developed afterwards. But Sunnis have been there since the time of Sahaba and Imam Husayn was definitely a Sunni. He was definitely NOT an Ithna Ashari.
-
😊 And Sunni? OK, which Sunni? Hanafi, Maliki, Shafa'ee or may be Hanbali? 😊 Murdered by Shias of Kufah? OK, where exactly were the Sunnis hiding at the time? May be they were all on holiday in Barbados 😊
"You have just messed his head up with that statement of truth now watch how many counter questions are coming your way😊"
No counter questions from me. I know you're already frightened out of your..... Don't want to scare you any further incase you don't sleep well. 😀
What’s up?? You gotta surprise did you? Imam Hussein was a follower of SUNNAH and not no divine imam fairytale believer😂
I know your neend has gone haram now, first shura got you now imam Hussein ra being a Sunni has nailed you........”which Sunni is it?”😂👍
He definitely wasn’t a Shiite and you have NO proof for such either........maybe the hidden one can guide you the divine hidden one behind the clouds 😂
-
What’s up?? You gotta surprise did you? Imam Hussein was a follower of SUNNAH and not no divine imam fairytale believer😂
I know your neend has gone haram now, first shura got you now imam Hussein ra being a Sunni has nailed you........”which Sunni is it?”😂👍
He definitely wasn’t a Shiite and you have NO proof for such either........maybe the hidden one can guide you the divine hidden one behind the clouds 😂
"Imam Hussein was a follower of SUNNAH"
And we are also followers of the Sunah and the same Sunah. And that is the Sunah of Muhammad s.a.w and certainly not Hanifa or anyone else 😊
"and not no divine imam fairytale believer"
Absolutely. I agree. He was no divine Imam fairytale believer. But in fact he was the DIVINE IMAM himself and we are the fairytale believers 😊
"He definitely wasn’t a Shiite"
Again, absolutely I agree. He definitely wasn't a Shia. But in fact we are HIS SHIA 😊
"maybe the hidden one can guide you"
We receive our guidance by Allah and through our Imam and Mujtahids. You on the other hand either have a DIRECT LINE with Allah or you know through whom you receive yours. 😊
-
"Imam Hussein was a follower of SUNNAH"
And we are also followers of the Sunah and the same Sunah. And that is the Sunah of Muhammad s.a.w and certainly not Hanifa or anyone else 😊
"and not no divine imam fairytale believer"
Absolutely. I agree. He was no divine Imam fairytale believer. But in fact he was the DIVINE IMAM himself and we are the fairytale believers 😊
"He definitely wasn’t a Shiite"
Again, absolutely I agree. He definitely wasn't a Shia. But in fact we are HIS SHIA 😊
"maybe the hidden one can guide you"
We receive our guidance by Allah and through our Imam and Mujtahids. You on the other hand either have a DIRECT LINE with Allah or you know through whom you receive yours. 😊
I am pretty sure divine leadership finished with prophet saw unless you are a follower of a certain guy who came up with the idea of divinity carries on.........the details of which you will always never fail to provide however stupid it sounds😉
Fairytale believers for sure you are, the brave fairytale believers who cowered and ran when the imams needed help oh you got plenty of tales on that, imams knew they were just normal beings with no special divine leadership role, but the fairytale believers knew BETTER! 😉
Oh yea nice His Shia left Him ra and watched His cousin get martyred and then let same happen to Him ra just like other other imams ra, He ra actually was a shia of Muhammed saw like all Muslims so please don’t drag great people like imam Hussein ra to your stupidity, divinity is your concept not Imams ra 😉
Huh??? So the Quran is not much of a guidance to you that you have to go through 2 persons a mujtahid and an imam to recieve it??
Ermmm where is that imam?? If he ain’t here and all the so called mujtahids use unauthentic material to fool the masses then how can i recieve my guidance from Allah swt??
😂
Quran is a guide for Muslims, Alhamdulillah.
“And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims.” 16/89
I get why you need 2 extra people to help you😊👍
-
I am pretty sure divine leadership finished with prophet saw unless you are a follower of a certain guy who came up with the idea of divinity carries on.........the details of which you will always never fail to provide however stupid it sounds😉
Fairytale believers for sure you are, the brave fairytale believers who cowered and ran when the imams needed help oh you got plenty of tales on that, imams knew they were just normal beings with no special divine leadership role, but the fairytale believers knew BETTER! 😉
Oh yea nice His Shia left Him ra and watched His cousin get martyred and then let same happen to Him ra just like other other imams ra, He ra actually was a shia of Muhammed saw like all Muslims so please don’t drag great people like imam Hussein ra to your stupidity, divinity is your concept not Imams ra 😉
Huh??? So the Quran is not much of a guidance to you that you have to go through 2 persons a mujtahid and an imam to recieve it??
Ermmm where is that imam?? If he ain’t here and all the so called mujtahids use unauthentic material to fool the masses then how can i recieve my guidance from Allah swt??
😂
Quran is a guide for Muslims, Alhamdulillah.
“And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims.” 16/89
I get why you need 2 extra people to help you😊👍
"I am pretty sure divine leadership finished with prophet saw unless you are a follower of a certain guy who came up with the idea of divinity carries on.........the details of which you will always never fail to provide however stupid it sounds😉"
You're PRETTY SURE but not ABSOLUTELY SURE. The uncertainty is there. Nice of you to admit and accept that. 😊
"the details of which you will always never fail to provide however stupid it sounds"
Well of course it will always sound stupid to you since you're SAQIFA DRIVEN 😊
"believers who cowered and ran when the imams needed help"
"Oh yea nice His Shia left Him ra and watched His cousin get martyred and then let same happen to Him ra just like other other imams ra"
Heard it many times and will ask the same question again which you can never answer, AND WHERE WERE THE SUNNIS AT THE TIME?" 😊 On vacation?
"He ra actually was a shia"
Now that's a contradiction. In the previous post you said he wasn't a Shia but in fact a Sunni and now you've just admitted he was a Shia. So Allah finally got the truth out of you eventually. Yes, he actually was a Shia. I agree. 😊
"Huh??? So the Quran is not much of a guidance to you that you have to go through 2 persons a mujtahid and an imam to recieve it??"
Get your facts right. Qur'an is the DIVINE BOOK and we have DIVINE TEACHERS. Allah guides us through the book and its teacher.
"Ermmm where is that imam?? If he ain’t here and all the so called mujtahids use unauthentic material to fool the masses then how can i recieve my guidance from Allah swt??"
Will answer this when I have free time. Don't sweat over it. 😊
-
"I am pretty sure divine leadership finished with prophet saw unless you are a follower of a certain guy who came up with the idea of divinity carries on.........the details of which you will always never fail to provide however stupid it sounds😉"
You're PRETTY SURE but not ABSOLUTELY SURE. The uncertainty is there. Nice of you to admit and accept that. 😊
"the details of which you will always never fail to provide however stupid it sounds"
Well of course it will always sound stupid to you since you're SAQIFA DRIVEN 😊
"believers who cowered and ran when the imams needed help"
"Oh yea nice His Shia left Him ra and watched His cousin get martyred and then let same happen to Him ra just like other other imams ra"
Heard it many times and will ask the same question again which you can never answer, AND WHERE WERE THE SUNNIS AT THE TIME?" 😊 On vacation?
"He ra actually was a shia"
Now that's a contradiction. In the previous post you said he wasn't a Shia but in fact a Sunni and now you've just admitted he was a Shia. So Allah finally got the truth out of you eventually. Yes, he actually was a Shia. I agree. 😊
"Huh??? So the Quran is not much of a guidance to you that you have to go through 2 persons a mujtahid and an imam to recieve it??"
Get your facts right. Qur'an is the DIVINE BOOK and we have DIVINE TEACHERS. Allah guides us through the book and its teacher.
"Ermmm where is that imam?? If he ain’t here and all the so called mujtahids use unauthentic material to fool the masses then how can i recieve my guidance from Allah swt??"
Will answer this when I have free time. Don't sweat over it. 😊
Pretty sure as in sarcastically?? You no get it it? Shows your mentality 😊 erm how old are you?
No proofs but ad hom attacks, typical Shiite response when nothing else to lie about😉👍
Sunnis didn’t call Him Imam Hussein ra.......that would be your ancestors who called Him to His martyrdom and then RAN like the last hero of the heroes😉
Well done out of all that Shiite nonsense you are spewing you forgot the divine part 😂 we are all shia of the divine Nabi saw including the imams.........only believers in fairytales attach the divine part to His offspring😉
Erm......FACT CHECK!
Shiites follow a DIVINE BOOK 👍
Shiites have DIVINE TEACHERS🤔
Erm the second one is definitely NOT A FACT unless you can help me meet the divine teacher or infact help ALL the ummah to meet Him and we can learn REAL GUIDANCE from him and make Islam a success.......no?!?
You can’t answer it’s been 1400 years don’t bother😊
-
Pretty sure as in sarcastically?? You no get it it? Shows your mentality 😊 erm how old are you?
No proofs but ad hom attacks, typical Shiite response when nothing else to lie about😉👍
Sunnis didn’t call Him Imam Hussein ra.......that would be your ancestors who called Him to His martyrdom and then RAN like the last hero of the heroes😉
Well done out of all that Shiite nonsense you are spewing you forgot the divine part 😂 we are all shia of the divine Nabi saw including the imams.........only believers in fairytales attach the divine part to His offspring😉
Erm......FACT CHECK!
Shiites follow a DIVINE BOOK 👍
Shiites have DIVINE TEACHERS🤔
Erm the second one is definitely NOT A FACT unless you can help me meet the divine teacher or infact help ALL the ummah to meet Him and we can learn REAL GUIDANCE from him and make Islam a success.......no?!?
You can’t answer it’s been 1400 years don’t bother😊
"Pretty sure as in sarcastically?? You no get it it? Shows your mentality 😊 erm how old are you?"
It's got nothing to do with my mentality. One either needs to be psychic or childish to figure you out.
"No proofs but ad hom attacks, typical Shiite response when nothing else to lie about😉👍"
Plenty of proofs but Saqifa goes straight out of the window. That's the reason why you can't digest the truth.
"Sunnis didn’t call Him Imam Hussein ra.......that would be your ancestors who called Him to His martyrdom and then RAN like the last hero of the heroes😉:
And where exactly were the Sunnis? Or they just didn't care? 😊 Or may be they didn't exist 😑
"we are all shia"
Fabulous 😊 I knew the truth would eventually come out.
"Erm the second one is definitely NOT A FACT unless you can help me meet the divine teacher or infact help ALL the ummah to meet Him and we can learn REAL GUIDANCE from him and make Islam a success.......no?!?"
We can only begin this once you shake off the Saqifa fever 😊 You have to develop an open mind for this.
"You can’t answer it’s been 1400 years don’t bother😊"
How long has it been since you've been without a rightly guided Caliph 😊 Saqifa long gone but still dwells in your mind.
-
"Pretty sure as in sarcastically?? You no get it it? Shows your mentality 😊 erm how old are you?"
It's got nothing to do with my mentality. One either needs to be psychic or childish to figure you out.
"No proofs but ad hom attacks, typical Shiite response when nothing else to lie about😉👍"
Plenty of proofs but Saqifa goes straight out of the window. That's the reason why you can't digest the truth.
"Sunnis didn’t call Him Imam Hussein ra.......that would be your ancestors who called Him to His martyrdom and then RAN like the last hero of the heroes😉:
And where exactly were the Sunnis? Or they just didn't care? 😊 Or may be they didn't exist 😑
"we are all shia"
Fabulous 😊 I knew the truth would eventually come out.
"Erm the second one is definitely NOT A FACT unless you can help me meet the divine teacher or infact help ALL the ummah to meet Him and we can learn REAL GUIDANCE from him and make Islam a success.......no?!?"
We can only begin this once you shake off the Saqifa fever 😊 You have to develop an open mind for this.
"You can’t answer it’s been 1400 years don’t bother😊"
How long has it been since you've been without a rightly guided Caliph 😊 Saqifa long gone but still dwells in your mind.
Trust me you have to be mental in your case in a straight jacket believing in fairytales😉
Shura clear in the Quran
Divine Imamate not at all
Compare the two to this verse
“And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims.” 16/89
Yes shura is clarified but divine Imamate??? I haven’t seen any clear clarification coming from your side, so might as well chuck that theory out of the window......for real😉
Don’t worry about Sunnis they were telling him not to go because these darn kuffans are treacherous and will not help you........And the kuffans didn’t disappoint on that😉
Yes shia as in a follower as in a follower of prophet saw’s sunnah.......you came afterwards and called yourself 12’r shiites followers of ibn sabas divine Imamate theory😊
So you have to believe in a scared imam who ran for the fear of his life and god hid him from killers while the killers roamed around freely and enjoyed life........you definitely have an open mind for creating fairytales I gotta give you that😂👍
Our khalifs weren’t divine, we can live with that, Alhamdulillah👍
Better that than forcing yourself to believe in superhuman fairytales of atom movers who couldnt protect their own wives and a hidden being hiding for centuries who you will never see because he is so scared and fearful.......even tho we have Iran and hezbullah and other Shiites totalling 150 mill the guy still won’t come out😂
I think it’s time for your pills kid😂
-
Trust me you have to be mental in your case in a straight jacket believing in fairytales😉
Shura clear in the Quran
Divine Imamate not at all
Compare the two to this verse
“And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims.” 16/89
Yes shura is clarified but divine Imamate??? I haven’t seen any clear clarification coming from your side, so might as well chuck that theory out of the window......for real😉
Don’t worry about Sunnis they were telling him not to go because these darn kuffans are treacherous and will not help you........And the kuffans didn’t disappoint on that😉
Yes shia as in a follower as in a follower of prophet saw’s sunnah.......you came afterwards and called yourself 12’r shiites followers of ibn sabas divine Imamate theory😊
So you have to believe in a scared imam who ran for the fear of his life and god hid him from killers while the killers roamed around freely and enjoyed life........you definitely have an open mind for creating fairytales I gotta give you that😂👍
Our khalifs weren’t divine, we can live with that, Alhamdulillah👍
Better that than forcing yourself to believe in superhuman fairytales of atom movers who couldnt protect their own wives and a hidden being hiding for centuries who you will never see because he is so scared and fearful.......even tho we have Iran and hezbullah and other Shiites totalling 150 mill the guy still won’t come out😂
I think it’s time for your pills kid😂
"Shura clear in the Quran
Divine Imamate not at all
Compare the two to this verse"
Shura clear in the Qur'an but no where to be seen after the demise of the Prophet s.a.w Not in Saqifa since everbody was busy in mourning the Prophet s.a.w and his funeral procession.
The first Caliph named and appointed his successor. And the second Caliph left only a five man committee to decide who would be Caliph. So where is Shura, its method and procedure?
"Yes shura is clarified but divine Imamate??? I haven’t seen any clear clarification coming from your side, so might as well chuck that theory out of the window......for real😉"
Many examples from the Qur'an have been given on Imamah but Saqifa won't let anything digest. And here it is again the Sunni buster question,
was Abraham promoted, was he demoted or given a title of a similar nature and grade? ☺ Muthbuster, meet Sunni buster.
"And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims.” 16/89
How does this verse give people the right to choose their Caliph? Did Allah put Caliphate into the hands of the people? Prove it from the Qur'an and not Saqifa ☺
"Don’t worry about Sunnis they were telling him not to go because these darn kuffans are treacherous and will not help you........And the kuffans didn’t disappoint on that😉"
Who were these Sunnis who were telling him not to go? They only advised him but refused to protect him? Wow, some Sunnis we have here.
-
"Shura clear in the Quran
Divine Imamate not at all
Compare the two to this verse"
Shura clear in the Qur'an but no where to be seen after the demise of the Prophet s.a.w Not in Saqifa since everbody was busy in mourning the Prophet s.a.w and his funeral procession.
The first Caliph named and appointed his successor. And the second Caliph left only a five man committee to decide who would be Caliph. So where is Shura, its method and procedure?
"Yes shura is clarified but divine Imamate??? I haven’t seen any clear clarification coming from your side, so might as well chuck that theory out of the window......for real😉"
Many examples from the Qur'an have been given on Imamah but Saqifa won't let anything digest. And here it is again the Sunni buster question,
was Abraham promoted, was he demoted or given a title of a similar nature and grade? ☺ Muthbuster, meet Sunni buster.
"And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things and as guidance and mercy and good tidings for the Muslims.” 16/89
How does this verse give people the right to choose their Caliph? Did Allah put Caliphate into the hands of the people? Prove it from the Qur'an and not Saqifa ☺
"Don’t worry about Sunnis they were telling him not to go because these darn kuffans are treacherous and will not help you........And the kuffans didn’t disappoint on that😉"
Who were these Sunnis who were telling him not to go? They only advised him but refused to protect him? Wow, some Sunnis we have here.
Questions questions counter questions 😂👍
I noticed you posted my quote but not the verse of the Quran maybe the clarification part is too much for you😂👍
Doesnt matter what but shura is in the Quran it’s not my fault divinity Imamate is not there and you can’t explain it clear apart from giving examples, hence you are a minority whom always have been Shiites when confronted you have no clear answers but just examples as you are doing CLEARLY.....Alhamdulillah all I have to do is ruffle your feathers of divinity fake Imamate and you turn into a mental retard with repitive circular questions that bite you back in the ....😜
Yes.....but the great divine entity of Imamate according to you.......did give his bayah to the first khalif.........hmmmmm🤔
He NEVER claimed it was wrong infact he wanted same process for himself in your books.🤔
He NEVER mentioned any divine Imamate leadership........that would be THE fairytale which you created and are latching on to him and are finding it so difficult to explain that closest you can get is the word “promotion”, without clear evidence from Quran or sunnah....Alhamdulillah👍
Sunni buster Ibrahim as PROMOTED
Shiite buster prophet saw wasn’t PROMOTED and the imams bypassed PROMOTION to get it straight without any trial 🤔
Answer that you keep evading that and ask a million different other questions.
Can you read? Ok change your Shiite goggles to normal READING glasses have a sip of water and......relax.😉
The verse I posted says “clarified”........my point is the book is 100% right shura is clarified.
Yet for the love of god you still haven’t given any clear clarification from the book on divine Imamate instead bombarding us with promotion theories and examples of other prophets.
Shura is definitely a thorn in your life, it beats divine Imamate hands down.😊
Alhamdulillah.
😂👍 yes at least we ADVISED Him not to go........yet your ancestors CALLED Him and then ran when the Syrian soldiers started showing their presence (typical Shiites).....Sunnis were right that Shiites enticed Him to come and then left Him to get martyred.........Nasty kuffans, killers of prophets grandson your heroes😉👍
-
Questions questions counter questions 😂👍
I noticed you posted my quote but not the verse of the Quran maybe the clarification part is too much for you😂👍
Doesnt matter what but shura is in the Quran it’s not my fault divinity Imamate is not there and you can’t explain it clear apart from giving examples, hence you are a minority whom always have been Shiites when confronted you have no clear answers but just examples as you are doing CLEARLY.....Alhamdulillah all I have to do is ruffle your feathers of divinity fake Imamate and you turn into a mental retard with repitive circular questions that bite you back in the ....😜
Yes.....but the great divine entity of Imamate according to you.......did give his bayah to the first khalif.........hmmmmm🤔
He NEVER claimed it was wrong infact he wanted same process for himself in your books.🤔
He NEVER mentioned any divine Imamate leadership........that would be THE fairytale which you created and are latching on to him and are finding it so difficult to explain that closest you can get is the word “promotion”, without clear evidence from Quran or sunnah....Alhamdulillah👍
Sunni buster Ibrahim as PROMOTED
Shiite buster prophet saw wasn’t PROMOTED and the imams bypassed PROMOTION to get it straight without any trial 🤔
Answer that you keep evading that and ask a million different other questions.
Can you read? Ok change your Shiite goggles to normal READING glasses have a sip of water and......relax.😉
The verse I posted says “clarified”........my point is the book is 100% right shura is clarified.
Yet for the love of god you still haven’t given any clear clarification from the book on divine Imamate instead bombarding us with promotion theories and examples of other prophets.
Shura is definitely a thorn in your life, it beats divine Imamate hands down.😊
Alhamdulillah.
😂👍 yes at least we ADVISED Him not to go........yet your ancestors CALLED Him and then ran when the Syrian soldiers started showing their presence (typical Shiites).....Sunnis were right that Shiites enticed Him to come and then left Him to get martyred.........Nasty kuffans, killers of prophets grandson your heroes😉👍
"Questions questions counter questions 😂"
If you, Muslim 720 or another comes around with "Questions questions counter questions" Then that's fine. 😊
Imamah is absolutely and definitely clear in the Qur'an but you don't intend to accept it because it goes against what you believe in. And what you believe in is the Shaykhain and Saqifa.
Allah and only Allah chooses and makes Caliphs and Imams. Also the logic is there that the Prophet s.a.w did name and appoint someone to govern after him and that someone was from the Ahle Baith. But people had problems accepting and digesting this then just as now.
Oppression and tyranny did start and is making its way to fill the world. And Allah is allowing people to have and get their way for it to be clear and seen. Once the people have had enough of having their way and the results can be clearly seen, then Allah will send a man from the Ahle Baith to put things right that started to go wrong right at the very beginning. And that beginning was SAQIFA 😊
-
Blah blah blah........yawn 😴
Imamate goes against my belief hence I can’t accept it?!?
It’s YOU who are adamant on it being in the Quran, yet have problems showing it clear as asked, then you go on some story and if we was to agree......it goes against our belief??......honestly!?
Promotion!!
Still waiting👍
-
Blah blah blah........yawn 😴
Imamate goes against my belief hence I can’t accept it?!?
It’s YOU who are adamant on it being in the Quran, yet have problems showing it clear as asked, then you go on some story and if we was to agree......it goes against our belief??......honestly!?
Promotion!!
Still waiting👍
Well people full of arrogance and ignorance like you spend their whole life burning but still won't accept the truth no matter how clear. 😊
You think the Prophet s.a.w passed away without naming and appointing someone to govern after him, without addressing this extremely important matter and issue. We on the other hand don't.
This is where one needs to start off from. It is also clear in the Qur'an that Allah alone makes Caliphs and Imams. Give me any nation which was allowed to gather and choose their own leader.
But still Saqifa falls short that people didn't gather their to select a leader. Only the heads of the Ansar gathered to select their own leader and I wonder why. And only three Muhajir quietly and secretly rushed there to prevent that from happening. 😊😊😊
-
You think the Prophet s.a.w passed away without naming and appointing someone to govern after him, without addressing this extremely important matter and issue.
Why didn't the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم instruct us how to use electricity for power? That is also an extremely important matter. According to you, all important matters must be addressed by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم
-
saqifa Alhamdulillah burns you we know.👍
Yes prophet saw passed away without appointing a leader, we do believe He saw did have His choice but it will burn you, instead He saw left it to the ummah to follow the way of the Quran and choose a leader through shura, mutual consultation, which in history happened and His choice was the one who became leader with the title of khilafat e rasul saw and the ummah agreed with Alhamdulillah.
It wasn’t prophet saw’s job to appoint leaders after Him, your kind believe it is Allah swt that appoints yet you haven’t provided clear proofs for such apart from your own babble.
Now.......promotion......why you always avoiding this main point?😉
-
Well, Imam Hussain's (ra) brother handed the Caliphate to Yazeed's father knowing that he (Yazeed's father) would break all the conditions agreed upon and that he would appoint his own son as the Caliph. Why would Imam Hassan (ra), having knowledge of the future, do such a thing?
-
Well, Imam Hussain's (ra) brother handed the Caliphate to Yazeed's father knowing that he (Yazeed's father) would break all the conditions agreed upon and that he would appoint his own son as the Caliph. Why would Imam Hassan (ra), having knowledge of the future, do such a thing?
Because Hassan had the knowledge of the unknown and unseen. Now having such knowledge, what does this mean? You don't allow nature to take its course and you take matters into your own hands just because you have such knowledge?
Have you heard of Loh e Mehfooz? Now if Allah grants someone knowledge from this slate and this knowledge is about what is going to happen and how then does one have the right to use that knowledge to change things?
If yes then what is the point of Ilm e Ghaib and Loh e Mehfooz? You really need to do some research on Ilm e Ghaib and Loh e Mehfooz. Actually you need to do research on a lot of things. All you do is just shoot your mouth off left, right and centre without knowing and thinking.
-
Being informed or knowing something in advance is a different thing. The police, local authority, intelligence service or law enforcement agency have been tipped of about something or they've got someone under surveillance which gives them advance knowledge and information is not knowledge of the unseen and unknown, this is not ilm e Ghaib.
As I have said before that Allah only and alone has complete and absolute knowledge of the unseen and unknown, despite this why did he and does he allow this, that and the other to happen? Allah not only knew but Satan also told him that he will do what ever he can to lead mankind astray then why didn't Allah stop him and protect mankind?
Not only this Satan asked for his reward regarding his loyalty and service and the things he asked for were means and tools to lead mankind astray and still Allah knowingly granted him, why? If only Allah knows because he is infallible then only those know who have been graced with infallibility and given such knowledge know as well 😊
-
Well, Imam Hussain's (ra) brother handed the Caliphate to Yazeed's father knowing that he (Yazeed's father) would break all the conditions agreed upon and that he would appoint his own son as the Caliph. Why would Imam Hassan (ra), having knowledge of the future, do such a thing?
"Hasan–Muawiya treaty. In 661 CE, after Ali's murder, Hasan ibn Ali attained to the caliphate. There was a military conflict between Ahl al-Bayt and Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan (see Battle of Siffin); and to avoid the agonies of a further civil war, Hasan signed the Hasan–Muawiya treaty with Muawiyah"
And addition to my reply, what would you do? Put an end to the bloodshed or allow it to continue knowing that your rival is well influenced and we'll equipped? If you know someone's intentions can you hold them responsible for their intentions or once they've turned those intentions into actions basically put those intentions into practice?
It was a treaty, an agreement. Who's responsible, the one who goes into it for the benefit of the Muslims and honours it (Hassan) or the one who dishonoured it by completely breaking it (Muawiya)? 'Well Hassan knew this and he knew that', he was just informed of the unknown if that is the case. And how do you actually convince people?
-
saqifa Alhamdulillah burns you we know.👍
Yes prophet saw passed away without appointing a leader, we do believe He saw did have His choice but it will burn you, instead He saw left it to the ummah to follow the way of the Quran and choose a leader through shura, mutual consultation, which in history happened and His choice was the one who became leader with the title of khilafat e rasul saw and the ummah agreed with Alhamdulillah.
It wasn’t prophet saw’s job to appoint leaders after Him, your kind believe it is Allah swt that appoints yet you haven’t provided clear proofs for such apart from your own babble.
Now.......promotion......why you always avoiding this main point?😉
Well Alhamdulillah it would burn anybody with a bit of sense, logic, decency and moral standards. Knowing that people did not gather/assemble in Saqifa to name and appoint a leader. And you talk about Shura but no method and procedure in place or mentioned? No principles or rules and regulations about Shura. So what type of Shura was this at Saqifa?
-
Well Alhamdulillah it would burn anybody with a bit of sense, logic, decency and moral standards. Knowing that people did not gather/assemble in Saqifa to name and appoint a leader. And you talk about Shura but no method and procedure in place or mentioned? No principles or rules and regulations about Shura. So what type of Shura was this at Saqifa?
Thing is there is no sense in believing in an ideology that you cannot provide CKEAR proofs for........look at all your posts when you cannot give clear answers it’s US who are blind and cannot see.😂👍
See.......shura this shura that I know it gives you nightmares and even worse I can back it up from the Quran and sunnah...........after hundereds of your posts you can’t do the same.😉👍
Why are you avoiding promotion??
Was that made up in your head??😂😂👍
-
Because Hassan had the knowledge of the unknown and unseen. Now having such knowledge, what does this mean? You don't allow nature to take its course and you take matters into your own hands just because you have such knowledge?
Would you not take matters in your hands to save your 3rd "infallible" Imam (ra)? At least I would have taken things in my hands to save Imam Hussain (ra). Therefore, I am better than Imam Hassan (ra) when it comes to preventing injustice.
After all, the Shias keep asking us the same question! Whose side would we have been on? While we would have wholeheartedly supported Imam Hussain (ra), it seems like his own brother failed him.
However, if you argue that things had to run their course, I wonder then why do you spend year after year slapping yourselves over what happened!
If yes then what is the point of Ilm e Ghaib and Loh e Mehfooz? You really need to do some research on Ilm e Ghaib and Loh e Mehfooz. Actually you need to do research on a lot of things.
I understand "al-lawh al-mahfooz", not the Persian pronounced "loh e mehfooz".
Being informed or knowing something in advance is a different thing. The police, local authority, intelligence service or law enforcement agency have been tipped of about something or they've got someone under surveillance which gives them advance knowledge and information is not knowledge of the unseen and unknown, this is not ilm e Ghaib.
And yet we see that the police, with some intelligence tip, intervene and prevent a crime better than did your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) who was in possession of knowledge of the unseen, lolll!
Police 1, Imams (ra) 0! hahaha!
-
Would you not take matters in your hands to save your 3rd "infallible" Imam (ra)? At least I would have taken things in my hands to save Imam Hussain (ra). Therefore, I am better than Imam Hassan (ra) when it comes to preventing injustice.
After all, the Shias keep asking us the same question! Whose side would we have been on? While we would have wholeheartedly supported Imam Hussain (ra), it seems like his own brother failed him.
However, if you argue that things had to run their course, I wonder then why do you spend year after year slapping yourselves over what happened!
I understand "al-lawh al-mahfooz", not the Persian pronounced "loh e mehfooz".
And yet we see that the police, with some intelligence tip, intervene and prevent a crime better than did your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) who was in possession of knowledge of the unseen, lolll!
Police 1, Imams (ra) 0! hahaha!
"Would you not take matters in your hands to save your 3rd "infallible" Imam (ra)?"
The answer is a very big NO. I would only follow my Imam's orders and definitely not take matters into my own hands. That's one of the major differences between Shia and Sunni concept and way of thinking. And this is due to lack of knowledge and understanding about Shia Imamah.
"At least I would have taken things in my hands to save Imam Hussain (ra)"
Please read thoroughly the incident of Karbala and go in depth.
"Therefore, I am better than Imam Hassan (ra) when it comes to preventing injustice"
Imam Hassan did what was necessary due to the situation and circumstances of the time. Imam Hussain did what was necessary due to the condition he was facing.
As far as preventing injustice is concerned emotions and feelings shouldn't get in the way. And one should not resort to violence or threatening behaviour.
It all depends on your priorities if you've got them in order. According to some people getting their way is prior, individual success is important and what is in your benefit and interest.
According to others the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims has priority above all and collective interest and success is important.
"After all, the Shias keep asking us the same question! Whose side would we have been on? While we would have wholeheartedly supported Imam Hussain (ra), it seems like his own brother failed him"
See what I mean, it's got nothing to do with sides but who was on the right. Might isn't right and it isn't necessary that those in authority and power are always right. It seems to you his brother failed.
If making peace for the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims is failure according to you then that's your thinking.
"However, if you argue that things had to run their course, I wonder then why do you spend year after year slapping yourselves over what happened"
For your information I don't slap myself. But no matter what I say I don't think it's going to make any difference to you and your thinking.
People commemorate the martyrdom of Hussain according to their own way based on culture and tradition on where they live, belong or come from.
-
Would you not take matters in your hands to save your 3rd "infallible" Imam (ra)? At least I would have taken things in my hands to save Imam Hussain (ra). Therefore, I am better than Imam Hassan (ra) when it comes to preventing injustice.
After all, the Shias keep asking us the same question! Whose side would we have been on? While we would have wholeheartedly supported Imam Hussain (ra), it seems like his own brother failed him.
However, if you argue that things had to run their course, I wonder then why do you spend year after year slapping yourselves over what happened!
I understand "al-lawh al-mahfooz", not the Persian pronounced "loh e mehfooz".
And yet we see that the police, with some intelligence tip, intervene and prevent a crime better than did your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) who was in possession of knowledge of the unseen, lolll!
Police 1, Imams (ra) 0! hahaha!
"I understand "al-lawh al-mahfooz", not the Persian pronounced "loh e mehfooz"
Well it would have been nice if you discussed it rather than just mentioning pronunciation and then running away from it. 😊
"And yet we see that the police, with some intelligence tip, intervene and prevent a crime better than did your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) who was in possession of knowledge of the unseen, lolll!"
Am I talking to a brick wall here? I've mentioned ilm e Ghaib and al-lawh al-mahfooz but rather than touching and discussing this you want to joke about it 😊
"Police 1, Imams (ra) 0! hahaha!"
This is exactly what we call JAHALAT. Go on, have a laugh. 😊
-
Thing is there is no sense in believing in an ideology that you cannot provide CKEAR proofs for........look at all your posts when you cannot give clear answers it’s US who are blind and cannot see.😂👍
See.......shura this shura that I know it gives you nightmares and even worse I can back it up from the Quran and sunnah...........after hundereds of your posts you can’t do the same.😉👍
Why are you avoiding promotion??
Was that made up in your head??😂😂👍
And you seriously want a civilised discussion with me on Imamah? What, with your childish behaviour and gimmicks? 😊
-
And you seriously want a civilised discussion with me on Imamah? What, with your childish behaviour and gimmicks? 😊
What’s up? Does reality hurt? I’ve had discussions with you for you to turn around and say we are blind and are doing it on purpose........go check previous posts, you and your kind will resort to such once shura is shown to you very clear.😉
Promotion? Why you keep running from it? 😂👍
-
What’s up? Does reality hurt? I’ve had discussions with you for you to turn around and say we are blind and are doing it on purpose........go check previous posts, you and your kind will resort to such once shura is shown to you very clear.😉
Promotion? Why you keep running from it? 😂👍
Where was Shura in Saqifa, forget about anywhere else? Take a look at Abu Bakr's speech;
"Abu Bakr said, ‘O company of Ansaar! You are surely the recipient of the attributes which you have described and you have achieved them. But, Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish because they are renowned for their nobility and lineage, manners and conduct throughout the Arabian Peninsula and enjoy an undisputed position. It is only for your betterment that I do this, I present before you two people so that you may choose whomsoever you wish for the Caliphate. Saying this, Abu Bakr caught hold of my hand and that of Abu Ubaidah and presented us before the crowd. I disliked the last suggestion."
Where is Shura in the above? Let me tell you what's in the above and on what basis a selection was made by a handful of people.
"But, Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish because they are renowned for their nobility and lineage, manners and conduct throughout the Arabian Peninsula and enjoy an undisputed position"
'But Caliphate and government is ONLY THE RIGHT OF THE QURAISH? Excuse me? Where did Shura go? It didn't go anywhere, it just wasn't there to begin with 😊
So was a selection made on Shura or tribalism?
-
Where was Shura in Saqifa, forget about anywhere else? Take a look at Abu Bakr's speech;
"Abu Bakr said, ‘O company of Ansaar! You are surely the recipient of the attributes which you have described and you have achieved them. But, Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish because they are renowned for their nobility and lineage, manners and conduct throughout the Arabian Peninsula and enjoy an undisputed position. It is only for your betterment that I do this, I present before you two people so that you may choose whomsoever you wish for the Caliphate. Saying this, Abu Bakr caught hold of my hand and that of Abu Ubaidah and presented us before the crowd. I disliked the last suggestion."
Where is Shura in the above? Let me tell you what's in the above and on what basis a selection was made by a handful of people.
"But, Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish because they are renowned for their nobility and lineage, manners and conduct throughout the Arabian Peninsula and enjoy an undisputed position"
'But Caliphate and government is ONLY THE RIGHT OF THE QURAISH? Excuse me? Where did Shura go? It didn't go anywhere, it just wasn't there to begin with 😊
So was a selection made on Shura or tribalism?
Can you cite the source for your quote of sayyidina Abi Bakr رضى الله عنه so I can check it in Arabic and see what the reality is.
-
Sehih Bukhari
Volume 5, Book 57, Number 19 :
Narrated by 'Aisha
(the wife of the Prophet)
Allah's Apostle died while Abu Bakr was at a place called As-Sunah (Al-'Aliya) 'Umar stood up and said, "By Allah! Allah's Apostle is not dead!" 'Umar (later on) said, "By Allah! Nothing occurred to my mind except that." He said, "Verily! Allah will resurrect him and he will cut the hands and legs of some men." Then Abu Bakr came and uncovered the face of Allah's Apostle, kissed him and said, "Let my mother and father be sacrificed for you, (O Allah's Apostle), you are good in life and in death. By Allah in Whose Hands my life is, Allah will never make you taste death twice."
Then he went out and said, "O oath-taker! Don't be hasty." When Abu Bakr spoke, 'Umar sat down. Abu Bakr praised and glorified Allah and said, No doubt! Whoever worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, then Allah is Alive and shall never die." Then he recited Allah's Statement.: "(O Muhammad) Verily you will die, and they also will die." (39.30) He also recited: "Muhammad is no more than an Apostle; and indeed many Apostles have passed away, before him, If he dies Or is killed, will you then Turn back on your heels? And he who turns back On his heels, not the least Harm will he do to Allah And Allah will give reward to those Who are grateful." (3.144)
The people wept loudly, and the Ansar were assembled with Sad bin 'Ubada in the shed of Bani Saida. They said (to the emigrants). "There should be one 'Amir from us and one from you." Then Abu Bakr, Umar bin Al-Khattab and Abu 'baida bin Al-Jarrah went to them. 'Umar wanted to speak but Abu Bakr stopped him. 'Umar later on used to say, "By Allah, I intended only to say something that appealed to me and I was afraid that Abu Bakr would not speak so well. Then Abu Bakr spoke and his speech was very eloquent. He said in his statement, "We are the rulers and you (Ansars) are the ministers (i.e. advisers),"
Hubab bin Al-Mundhir said, "No, by Allah we won't accept this. But there must be a ruler from us and a ruler from you." Abu Bakr said, "No, we will be the rulers and you will be the ministers, for they (i.e. Quarish) are the best family amongst the 'Arabs and of best origin. So you should elect either 'Umar or Abu 'Ubaida bin Al-Jarrah as your ruler." 'Umar said (to Abu Bakr), "No but we elect you, for you are our chief and the best amongst us and the most beloved of all of us to Allah's Apostle."
So 'Umar took Abu Bakr's hand and gave the pledge of allegiance and the people too gave the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr. Someone said, "You have killed Sad bin Ubada." 'Umar said, "Allah has killed him." 'Aisha said (in another narration), ("When the Prophet was on his death-bed) he looked up and said thrice, (Amongst) the Highest Companion (See Qur'an 4.69)' Aisha said, Allah benefited the people by their two speeches. 'Umar frightened the people some of whom were hypocrites whom Allah caused to abandon Islam because of 'Umar's speech.
Then Abu Bakr led the people to True Guidance and acquainted them with the right path they were to follow so that they went out reciting: "Muhammad is no more than an Apostle and indeed many Apostles have passed away before him..." (3.144)
-
Sehih Bukhari
Volume 5, Book 57, Number 19 :
Narrated by 'Aisha
(the wife of the Prophet)
Allah's Apostle died while Abu Bakr was at a place called As-Sunah (Al-'Aliya) 'Umar stood up and said, "By Allah! Allah's Apostle is not dead!" 'Umar (later on) said, "By Allah! Nothing occurred to my mind except that." He said, "Verily! Allah will resurrect him and he will cut the hands and legs of some men." Then Abu Bakr came and uncovered the face of Allah's Apostle, kissed him and said, "Let my mother and father be sacrificed for you, (O Allah's Apostle), you are good in life and in death. By Allah in Whose Hands my life is, Allah will never make you taste death twice."
Then he went out and said, "O oath-taker! Don't be hasty." When Abu Bakr spoke, 'Umar sat down. Abu Bakr praised and glorified Allah and said, No doubt! Whoever worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, then Allah is Alive and shall never die." Then he recited Allah's Statement.: "(O Muhammad) Verily you will die, and they also will die." (39.30) He also recited: "Muhammad is no more than an Apostle; and indeed many Apostles have passed away, before him, If he dies Or is killed, will you then Turn back on your heels? And he who turns back On his heels, not the least Harm will he do to Allah And Allah will give reward to those Who are grateful." (3.144)
The people wept loudly, and the Ansar were assembled with Sad bin 'Ubada in the shed of Bani Saida. They said (to the emigrants). "There should be one 'Amir from us and one from you." Then Abu Bakr, Umar bin Al-Khattab and Abu 'baida bin Al-Jarrah went to them. 'Umar wanted to speak but Abu Bakr stopped him. 'Umar later on used to say, "By Allah, I intended only to say something that appealed to me and I was afraid that Abu Bakr would not speak so well. Then Abu Bakr spoke and his speech was very eloquent. He said in his statement, "We are the rulers and you (Ansars) are the ministers (i.e. advisers),"
Hubab bin Al-Mundhir said, "No, by Allah we won't accept this. But there must be a ruler from us and a ruler from you." Abu Bakr said, "No, we will be the rulers and you will be the ministers, for they (i.e. Quarish) are the best family amongst the 'Arabs and of best origin. So you should elect either 'Umar or Abu 'Ubaida bin Al-Jarrah as your ruler." 'Umar said (to Abu Bakr), "No but we elect you, for you are our chief and the best amongst us and the most beloved of all of us to Allah's Apostle."
So 'Umar took Abu Bakr's hand and gave the pledge of allegiance and the people too gave the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr. Someone said, "You have killed Sad bin Ubada." 'Umar said, "Allah has killed him." 'Aisha said (in another narration), ("When the Prophet was on his death-bed) he looked up and said thrice, (Amongst) the Highest Companion (See Qur'an 4.69)' Aisha said, Allah benefited the people by their two speeches. 'Umar frightened the people some of whom were hypocrites whom Allah" caused to abandon Islam because of 'Umar's speech.
Then Abu Bakr led the people to True Guidance and acquainted them with the right path they were to follow so that they went out reciting: "Muhammad is no more than an Apostle and indeed many Apostles have passed away before him..." (3.144)
You are quoting something else. I asked for the source of this statement:
"Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish"
The Hadith you have quoted just now from Bukhari doesn't have these words. It doesn't say that government is only the right of the Quraish.
-
Can you cite the source for your quote of sayyidina Abi Bakr رضى الله عنه so I can check it in Arabic and see what the reality is.
Saheeh Bukhari, Kitabul Hudud, Baabul Rajmul Hablaa, 4/ 119-120
Seerae Ibne Hisham, 4/ 336-338 Kanz al-Ummaal, 3/ 139- Hadith 2326
-
You are quoting something else. I asked for the source of this statement:
"Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish"
The Hadith you have quoted just now from Bukhari doesn't have these words. It doesn't say that government is only the right of the Quraish.
That's true. I'm looking into this myself. Let me know how you get along.
-
Saheeh Bukhari, Kitabul Hudud, Baabul Rajmul Hablaa, 4/ 119-120
Seerae Ibne Hisham, 4/ 336-338 Kanz al-Ummaal, 3/ 139- Hadith 2326
The Hadith in Bukhari has these words:
فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ لاَ، وَلَكِنَّا الأُمَرَاءُ وَأَنْتُمُ الْوُزَرَاءُ هُمْ أَوْسَطُ الْعَرَبِ دَارًا، وَأَعْرَبُهُمْ أَحْسَابًا
In your original quote, you claimed that sayyidina Abi Bakr RA said: "Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish"
But these words are not found anywhere in the Hadith you quoted
-
The answer is a very big NO. I would only follow my Imam's orders and definitely not take matters into my own hands.
So you would have allowed Imam Hussain (ra) to walk right into a betrayal and ultimately his death and then you wonder why we say that Shias killed Imam Hussain (ra), lol! And what "order" did the Imam (ra) have on the situation? He could not even get his own supporters, his own Shia, to stand by him and you claim you would have obeyed his "order"! Well, you're a Shia like the Kufans who betrayed him. Your political and theological thought is the same as the Kufans, lol.
That's one of the major differences between Shia and Sunni concept and way of thinking.
Agreed one hundred percent. While you would have allowed the Imam (ra) to undertake a suicidal mission, I would have tried to save him.
Please read thoroughly the incident of Karbala and go in depth.
I have read and heard enough. If obeying the "order" of the Imam (ra) and not taking matters into your own hands was what you had done then you should condemn Hurr and everyone else who took "matters into" their own hands and tried to save the Imam (ra).
Imam Hassan did what was necessary due to the situation and circumstances of the time. Imam Hussain did what was necessary due to the condition he was facing.
That is the Sunni reasoning which can perfectly be explained by our beliefs. In the Shi'i theology, with the over-complication of "infallibility", you cannot have one "infallible" surrender and another fight. Don't know why this doesn't get in your thick head.
As far as preventing injustice is concerned emotions and feelings shouldn't get in the way. And one should not resort to violence or threatening behaviour.
So Imam Hussain (ra) was wrong for resorting to violence? After all, he did not see the support of thousands of Kufans (those who betrayed him) as a way to sing kumbaya!
According to others the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims has priority above all and collective interest and success is important.
Okay so now Imam Hassan (ra) was wrong? He handed the entire Ummah to a vicious man who only loved dunya!
If making peace for the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims is failure according to you then that's your thinking.
Now you are twitching out of control. If you say that making peace with Muawiya was for the well-being and benefit of Muslims then you should have a positive outlook on the appointment, and rule, of Yazeed. You should also stop crying over what happened at Karbala. In other words, if Imam Hassan (ra) saw benefit in Muawiya ruling, you should be the first one to accept Muawiya's rule. After all, you said you would "obey" the Imam (ra).
Well it would have been nice if you discussed it rather than just mentioning pronunciation and then running away from it.
I did not discuss them because the end-result is shameful for you. The police intervenes to prevent a crime with the slightest of intelligence tips; the 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra), knowing the unseen, did nothing to prevent the catastrophe that was to visit upon the Ummah and his own brother. He actually made way for the catastrophe to befell upon the Muslims and his own family, lol.
-
According to others the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims has priority above all and collective interest and success is important.
If making peace for the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims is failure according to you then that's your thinking.
By the way, thank you for admitting that rule by Muawiya - according to Imam Hassan (ra) - was for the welfare, benefit and success of the Muslims. lol, case closed!
-
By the way, thank you for admitting that rule by Muawiya - according to Imam Hassan (ra) - was for the welfare, benefit and success of the Muslims. lol, case closed!
☺ You can twist and turn as much as you like 😊 Your arrogance is getting the better of you.
-
The Hadith in Bukhari has these words:
فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ لاَ، وَلَكِنَّا الأُمَرَاءُ وَأَنْتُمُ الْوُزَرَاءُ هُمْ أَوْسَطُ الْعَرَبِ دَارًا، وَأَعْرَبُهُمْ أَحْسَابًا
In your original quote, you claimed that sayyidina Abi Bakr RA said: "Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish"
But these words are not found anywhere in the Hadith you quoted
Probably the quote is not exactly what the hadith says. I'm looking into it. The bottom line is what is Shura and how do you conduct it? Does it have a method and procedure? Why doesn't anyone want to touch this. Where was Shura in Saqifa in the selection of the first even the second Caliph? Did people gather in Saqifa for this purpose? Imamah is one issue and Caliphate by Shura is another.
-
By the way, thank you for admitting that rule by Muawiya - according to Imam Hassan (ra) - was for the welfare, benefit and success of the Muslims. lol, case closed!
You have already accused me of disrespecting the Qur'an and when I challenged over this, nothing from you. Now you accuse me of this. Not rule by Muawiya but peace treaty with Muawiya.
-
Probably the quote is not exactly what the hadith says. I'm looking into it. The bottom line is what is Shura and how do you conduct it? Does it have a method and procedure? Why doesn't anyone want to touch this. Where was Shura in Saqifa in the selection of the first even the second Caliph? Did people gather in Saqifa for this purpose? Imamah is one issue and Caliphate by Shura is another.
I've already answered this for you. The method and procedure of Shura is a matter of Ijtihad. Islam only gives us one general principle, that we should conduct our affairs through mutual consultation. Islam is not concerned how we do that, because its not a matter of Deen.
Does Islam give you explicit instructions on how to clean your house? You will say the Quran says Allah loves those who are clean. But does Islam explain the procedure for cleaning your house, i.e., vacuuming, mopping, brooming, dusting, etc.?
No, because that is not a matter of Deen, it is a secular matter on how to carry out the Shura according to the circumstances of the time, which are not static but are quite fluid.
-
I've already answered this for you. The method and procedure of Shura is a matter of Ijtihad. Islam only gives us one general principle, that we should conduct our affairs through mutual consultation. Islam is not concerned how we do that, because its not a matter of Deen.
Does Islam give you explicit instructions on how to clean your house? You will say the Quran says Allah loves those who are clean. But does Islam explain the procedure for cleaning your house, i.e., vacuuming, mopping, brooming, dusting, etc.?
No, because that is not a matter of Deen, it is a secular matter on how to carry out the Shura according to the circumstances of the time, which are not static but are quite fluid.
"I've already answered this for you. The method and procedure of Shura is a matter of Ijtihad. Islam only gives us one general principle, that we should conduct our affairs through mutual consultation. Islam is not concerned how we do that, because its not a matter of Deen"
Ok, so the method and procedure of Shura is a matter IJTIHAD and it is not a matter of DEEN. Can we back this up with some reference.
"Islam only gives us one general principle, that we should conduct our affairs through mutual consultation. Islam is not concerned how we do that"
Ok, so for example Islam tells us to pray or fast but is not concerned on how we actually pray or fast. Mmmmmm! Doesn’t really fit in, does it? Or Islam tells us about marriage and divorce but doesn't really care how we get married or get divorced?
"Does Islam give you explicit instructions on how to clean your house? You will say the Quran says Allah loves those who are clean. But does Islam explain the procedure for cleaning your house, i.e., vacuuming, mopping, brooming, dusting, etc.?"
Lets not be silly. Cleaning your house is one thing but choosing a successor or leader is another. There is no comparison. But still even cleaning your house will have a method and procedure. You will have one particular way of doing it and I'll have another. But there will be a procedure and method in our mind.
"No, because that is not a matter of Deen, it is a secular matter on how to carry out the Shura according to the circumstances of the time, which are not static but are quite fluid"
Point taken. But what I'm saying is there was no Shura in Saqifa to begin with. People didn't gather there to select a leader for the Ummah. Only the heads of the Ansar gathered to select their own leader.
This is what I've been asking for and what we need to look at in depth without worrying about the reputation and honour of the Shaykhain and their intentions.
-
Where was Shura in Saqifa, forget about anywhere else? Take a look at Abu Bakr's speech;
"Abu Bakr said, ‘O company of Ansaar! You are surely the recipient of the attributes which you have described and you have achieved them. But, Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish because they are renowned for their nobility and lineage, manners and conduct throughout the Arabian Peninsula and enjoy an undisputed position. It is only for your betterment that I do this, I present before you two people so that you may choose whomsoever you wish for the Caliphate. Saying this, Abu Bakr caught hold of my hand and that of Abu Ubaidah and presented us before the crowd. I disliked the last suggestion."
Where is Shura in the above? Let me tell you what's in the above and on what basis a selection was made by a handful of people.
"But, Caliphate and government is only the right of the Quraish because they are renowned for their nobility and lineage, manners and conduct throughout the Arabian Peninsula and enjoy an undisputed position"
'But Caliphate and government is ONLY THE RIGHT OF THE QURAISH? Excuse me? Where did Shura go? It didn't go anywhere, it just wasn't there to begin with 😊
So was a selection made on Shura or tribalism?
LOL
Didn’t Ali ra want the same? Letter 6?
Verily, the people who payed allegience to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegience to me based on the same principles as the allegience to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah. If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people. If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers. And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him.
🤔
Heck even Ali ra wanted shura and says it’s the RIGHT OF MUHAJIRS!!
Quran sunnah and now even the imam himself wanted shura, Alhamdulillah.
So again your theory is wrong.😂
Shura was selection Alhamdulillah even imams agreed with it.
DIVINE IMAMATE......
In the Quran = NO
Sunnah = NO
Imams ra = NO
In your mind = YES!
Forget tribalism your kind are chasing divine Imamate like it’s a monarchy and only the family can rule......like queen of England 🤔
😂👍
-
Come on please do explain promotion it’s been ages since saqifa and shura have messed up your head.👍
PROMOTION!
Why some get it some don’t and others bypass every test to be born with it.
I am eagerly awaiting.😉
-
Come on please do explain promotion it’s been ages since saqifa and shura have messed up your head.👍
PROMOTION!
Why some get it some don’t and others bypass every test to be born with it.
I am eagerly awaiting.😉
"since saqifa and shura have messed up your head."
Why don't you clear it then. 😊 There's plenty I've put forward on Saqifa and Shura,. But you can't touch anything let alone explaining and discussing. 😊
-
"since saqifa and shura have messed up your head."
Why don't you clear it then. 😊 There's plenty I've put forward on Saqifa and Shura,. But you can't touch anything let alone explaining and discussing. 😊
It’s clear and your acting like a nincompoop........only Allah swt can help you in this regard.😉
-
Promotion?
-
You have already accused me of disrespecting the Qur'an and when I challenged over this, nothing from you. Now you accuse me of this. Not rule by Muawiya but peace treaty with Muawiya.
Did peace with Muawiya not also include rule by Muawiya? It was a package deal, along with the conditions (to which Muawiya had to abide).
-
Did peace with Muawiya not also include rule by Muawiya? It was a package deal, along with the conditions (to which Muawiya had to abide).
There is a difference between 'peace with Muawiya' and 'going into an agreement with Muawiya'. There is a huge difference. Hassan went into agreement with Muawiya. And it was conditional. Hassan gave up Caliphate to stop the bloodshed Muawiya was causing. This was sacrifice on Hassan's behalf for a bigger and better cause.
Look at history carefully. In Saqifa if the Ansar choose a leader then what was wrong with that? Why couldn't the Shaykhain along with others accept the decision? But the Shaykhain warned the Ansar that this would cause a civil war. Note this, people wouldn't stand and allow someone else in authority.
Ali could have easily used his influence and connections to wage war against Abu Bakr, but he didn't do that. On the other hand Muawiya wouldn't give up war until he got his way. See the difference.
Just as the Prophet's s.a.w daughter could have easily used her influence and connections to do battle with the 1st, but she didn't. But the Prophet's s.a.w wife used her influence and connections to go to battle with the 4th. See the difference.
Also as long as Sunnis are in authority that is fine, the Shias will never resort to violence and threatening behaviour to get their way. Where as if the Sunnis aren't in authority or are out of authority, they will never rest or let the other succeed. See the difference.
-
It’s clear and your acting like a nincompoop........only Allah swt can help you in this regard.😉
You can also help me as well by answering, addressing and explaining yourself, your stance and position. Just stop talking and behaving like an idiot.
-
LOL
Didn’t Ali ra want the same? Letter 6?
Verily, the people who payed allegience to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegience to me based on the same principles as the allegience to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah. If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people. If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers. And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him.
🤔
Heck even Ali ra wanted shura and says it’s the RIGHT OF MUHAJIRS!!
Quran sunnah and now even the imam himself wanted shura, Alhamdulillah.
So again your theory is wrong.😂
Shura was selection Alhamdulillah even imams agreed with it.
DIVINE IMAMATE......
In the Quran = NO
Sunnah = NO
Imams ra = NO
In your mind = YES!
Forget tribalism your kind are chasing divine Imamate like it’s a monarchy and only the family can rule......like queen of England 🤔
😂👍
"Didn’t Ali ra want the same? Letter 6?"
NO, not at all. All Ali is saying is that when the first three came along Ali didn't cause disagreement and disturbance by opposing and challenging. But when Ali came along into authority by the same way and means then people started to faint or have fits. Ali is just saying "what's the problem now? 😀
"Heck even Ali ra wanted shura and says it’s the RIGHT OF MUHAJIRS!!
Quran sunnah and now even the imam himself wanted shura, Alhamdulillah.
So again your theory is wrong.😂"
Then why did certain people start to have fits when they heard Ali became Caliph 😀
"So again your theory is wrong.😂"
Let me complete your sentence for you,
So again your theory is wrong, along with those who opposed 😆
What is Shura?
1. a consultative council or assembly
2. the process of decision-making by consultation and deliberation
Nothing of the sort was used in choosing the first or second Caliph.
-
Are the following references true?
The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said:
“Our political authority shall remain with the Quraish…as long as they follow Islam.”
(Bukhari: Kitabu’l-Ahkam)
And the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) warned the Ansar:
“In this matter (i.e. leadership), bring forward the Quraish and do not try to supersede them.”
(Talkhis al-Habeer, Vol.2, p.26)
As well as:
“After me, the political authority shall be transferred to the Quraish.”
(Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hambal, vol. 3, p. 183)
The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) clearly explained the reason for this:
“People (of Arabia) in this matter (i.e. leadership) follow the Quraish. The believers of Arabia are the followers of their believers and the disbelievers of Arabia are the followers of their disbelievers.”
(Muslim, Kitabu’l-Imarah)
If the above is correct and true then the Prophet s.a.w did name and appoint towards governance. And Shura goes out of the window in the matter of leadership, Caliphate 😊
-
There is a difference between 'peace with Muawiya' and 'going into an agreement with Muawiya'. There is a huge difference.
So how many more ways can you split an already split piece of hair? Earlier, it was that "rule by Muawiya" was different than "peace with Muawiya". Now, you are distinguishing "peace with Muawiya" from "going into an agreement with Muawiya". You are so desperate that it makes me laugh.
Fact is that "peace with Muawiya" based on "an agreement with Muawiya" led to the "rule by Muawiya". And all of this was done by your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra).
Hassan went into agreement with Muawiya. And it was conditional. Hassan gave up Caliphate to stop the bloodshed Muawiya was causing. This was sacrifice on Hassan's behalf for a bigger and better cause.
You are like the atheists that describe to me how cells divide, which I - as a Bio major - understand very comprehensively, and they think they have accounted for why cells divide. I know the agreement! I want you to explain to us why would Imam Hassan (ra) choose to make peace with a man (Muawiya) who even conspired against his father (i.e., Imam Ali)?
Imam Hassan (ra) with (alleged) knowledge of the unseen, knowing that he will be betrayed, hands a second unreliable, vicious person the key to power and entrusts him with hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims. This while guiding the Muslims was his "Divinely Ordained Task" to begin with and he had the Caliphate. Maybe his father could not revolt against Abu Bakr (ra) due to lack of power and influence but Imam Hassan (ra) had worldly and outer-worldly powers. Yet he vacated his spot for Muawiya.
Either Imam Hassan (ra) was mistaken and Shias today know Muawiya better or Shias today must repent! Which one is it?
Look at history carefully. In Saqifa if the Ansar choose a leader then what was wrong with that? Why couldn't the Shaykhain along with others accept the decision? But the Shaykhain warned the Ansar that this would cause a civil war. Note this, people wouldn't stand and allow someone else in authority.
I know Saqifa gives you nightmares but it is outside the scope of our discussion. By the way, recite Ayat al-Kursi when you have Saqifa scares. In fact, you and your friends should wear a Saqifa-themed costume next Halloween. Might help you get over your fear!
Ali could have easily used his influence and connections to wage war against Abu Bakr, but he didn't do that. On the other hand Muawiya wouldn't give up war until he got his way. See the difference.
Imam Ali (ra), according to most Shias, had no influence and connections, as also attested by Ijtaba, which is why he did not revolt against Abu Bakr (ra). He, naudhubillah, went door-to-door but was refused help.
-
"Didn’t Ali ra want the same? Letter 6?"
NO, not at all. All Ali is saying is that when the first three came along Ali didn't cause disagreement and disturbance by opposing and challenging. But when Ali came along into authority by the same way and means then people started to faint or have fits. Ali is just saying "what's the problem now? 😀
"Heck even Ali ra wanted shura and says it’s the RIGHT OF MUHAJIRS!!
Quran sunnah and now even the imam himself wanted shura, Alhamdulillah.
So again your theory is wrong.😂"
Then why did certain people start to have fits when they heard Ali became Caliph 😀
"So again your theory is wrong.😂"
Let me complete your sentence for you,
So again your theory is wrong, along with those who opposed 😆
What is Shura?
1. a consultative council or assembly
2. the process of decision-making by consultation and deliberation
Nothing of the sort was used in choosing the first or second Caliph.
Yes so Ali ra wanted the same but it’s not our fault some didn’t want him to rule after all he wasn’t a DIVINE chosen leader was he, so who is hissy fitting over shura now? Ali wanted shura but you wanna do better and give him divinity.😉
Letter 6 is a noose round your neck😂
Yes your divine Imamate theory is wrong and made up, that should be the right sentence.
1) shura is mentioned in Quran
2) shura was a means of choosing agreed by prophet saw
Quran and sunnah
It’s much better than promotions which again comes from the top of your head😂😂😂
Your kind go in a fit when shura is applied in real life as your fairytale divine Imamate will collapse.😉👍
Where’s that imam hiding????😉
-
Ok, so the method and procedure of Shura is a matter IJTIHAD and it is not a matter of DEEN. Can we back this up with some reference.
The lack of any proof that it is a matter of Deen is the evidence itself. Anytime someone claims something is a matter of Deen, the onus is on him to prove it, not for the one negating that it is part of Deen to disprove it.
Similar to how I said the burden of proof is on Shiites to prove that Imamate is an institution in Islam. Sunnis do not have to prove that Imamate doesn't exist.
Ok, so for example Islam tells us to pray or fast but is not concerned on how we actually pray or fast. Mmmmmm! Doesn’t really fit in, does it? Or Islam tells us about marriage and divorce but doesn't really care how we get married or get divorced?
We agree that Islam has detailed instructions for us on these matters because they are clearly found in the Quran and Sunnah. Likewise, we ask you to show us clearly from Quran and Sunnah the institution of divinely appointed, infallible imamate.
Furthermore, the idea that there is a divinely appointed, infallible Imamate is contrary to the doctrine of Khatm an-Nubuwwah. Short of actually calling an Imam as Prophet, it is observed that in the Shiite doctrine the Imam has virtually all the qualities and status of an actual Prophet (and is in fact even superior to a Prophet).
Lets not be silly. Cleaning your house is one thing but choosing a successor or leader is another.
Says who?
There is no comparison. But still even cleaning your house will have a method and procedure. You will have one particular way of doing it and I'll have another. But there will be a procedure and method in our mind.
You just shot yourself in the foot with this statement. You say "you will have one particular way of doing it and I'll have another", meaning it there can be variation and difference of opinion because Islam has not given us a specific method that we must follow. It is up to our own intellect and circumstances to discover and practice a method we consider to be most effective. That is exactly our position on the method and procedure of Shura.
Point taken. But what I'm saying is there was no Shura in Saqifa to begin with. People didn't gather there to select a leader for the Ummah. Only the heads of the Ansar gathered to select their own leader.
Yes, that is one method of Shura, that only the elders and senior leaders within a community should be consulted because they are the representatives of the community, as opposed to consulting every single woman and child.
By all means you can disagree with this method of consultation, and you have the right to do so, because as I keep saying, it is not a matter of Deen.
In a tribal society the method of consultation will obviously differ from that of a modern nation state with completely different set of circumstances, such as constituents of the society, level of literacy and education, traditions, customs, culture, politics, etc.
Allah didn't give us Islam to spoon feed us as though we are robots that can't think for ourselves or use our imagination. The Quran says that humans are the superior creation precisely because we have the intellect and we can have great achievements. If Islam gave us detailed instructions for everything that would leave little room for humans to explore their own intellect and analyze their own situation.
Islam's purpose is to give us basic guidelines of morality. It's detailed instructions are mostly to do with how we worship Allah. But it has left us a lot of room to determine our own affairs on other matters, but it has praised the method of consultation.
-
Furthermore, the idea that there is a divinely appointed, infallible Imamate is contrary to the doctrine of Khatm an-Nubuwwah. Short of actually calling an Imam as Prophet, it is observed that in the Shiite doctrine the Imam has virtually all the qualities and status of an actual Prophet (and is in fact even superior to a prophet).
The truth of Saqifa blinds such people that they resort to nonsense ideas like above.....Astaghfirullah.
-
So how many more ways can you split an already split piece of hair? Earlier, it was that "rule by Muawiya" was different than "peace with Muawiya". Now, you are distinguishing "peace with Muawiya" from "going into an agreement with Muawiya". You are so desperate that it makes me laugh.
Fact is that "peace with Muawiya" based on "an agreement with Muawiya" led to the "rule by Muawiya". And all of this was done by your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra).
You are like the atheists that describe to me how cells divide, which I - as a Bio major - understand very comprehensively, and they think they have accounted for why cells divide. I know the agreement! I want you to explain to us why would Imam Hassan (ra) choose to make peace with a man (Muawiya) who even conspired against his father (i.e., Imam Ali)?
Imam Hassan (ra) with (alleged) knowledge of the unseen, knowing that he will be betrayed, hands a second unreliable, vicious person the key to power and entrusts him with hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims. This while guiding the Muslims was his "Divinely Ordained Task" to begin with and he had the Caliphate. Maybe his father could not revolt against Abu Bakr (ra) due to lack of power and influence but Imam Hassan (ra) had worldly and outer-worldly powers. Yet he vacated his spot for Muawiya.
Either Imam Hassan (ra) was mistaken and Shias today know Muawiya better or Shias today must repent! Which one is it?
I know Saqifa gives you nightmares but it is outside the scope of our discussion. By the way, recite Ayat al-Kursi when you have Saqifa scares. In fact, you and your friends should wear a Saqifa-themed costume next Halloween. Might help you get over your fear!
Imam Ali (ra), according to most Shias, had no influence and connections, as also attested by Ijtaba, which is why he did not revolt against Abu Bakr (ra). He, naudhubillah, went door-to-door but was refused help.
"Fact is that "peace with Muawiya" based on "an agreement with Muawiya" led to the "rule by Muawiya". And all of this was done by your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra)"
Did he have a choice? It was either continuous conflict resulting to more bloodshed or a peace treaty. Going in to peace treaty doesn't mean Muawiya was good and better and certainly doesn't prove that. Use your senses.
Ali was the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time. We know that but we can't criticise and condemn, deny and reject those who opposed the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the and the Ulul Amre of the time.
HONESTLY WHAT A JOKE THIS HAS BECOME BY CERTAIN SUNNIS😊
Muawiya didn't accept legitimate Caliphate of Ali how do you expect Muawiya to accept the legitimate Caliphate of Hassan the 5th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time 😊
This is you Nizam of Caliphate which you so fiercely defend from Saqifa but after Usman you throw it in doubt. 😆
DOUBLE STANDARDS 😆
"I want you to explain to us why would Imam Hassan (ra) choose to make peace with a man (Muawiya) who even conspired against his father (i.e., Imam Ali)?"
I'VE DONE IT QUITE A FEW TIMES NOW 😊
"Maybe his father could not revolt against Abu Bakr (ra) due to lack of power and influence"
Don't say that. We are talking about ALI the most feared and brave warrior. His performance in the battlefield is legendary where as the performance of your beloved individuals is also known and seen running up the hills and mountains in the battle of Uhad when the going got tough. 😊
"Imam Ali (ra), according to most Shias, had no influence and connections"
I STRONGLY DISAGREE. Ali had a choice just as we all do. Ali made the right choice.
"I know Saqifa gives you nightmares but it is outside the scope of our discussion"
No it doesn't. I've put plenty forward on Saqifa. By all means do jump in if you feel like you have it.
-
Saqifa rattles his bones😂😂😂😂😂
-
Saqifa rattles his bones😂😂😂😂😂
No it doesn't. I've said and put plenty forward on Saqifa. By all means do jump in if you feel like you have it. I don't think you've got what it takes to discuss and debate. That's why you come out with taunts and tantrums. And here's a few faces for you since you seem to be obsessed with them. 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
-
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته يا أمين, long time no speak :)
"Fact is that "peace with Muawiya" based on "an agreement with Muawiya" led to the "rule by Muawiya". And all of this was done by your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra)"
Did he have a choice? It was either continuous conflict resulting to more bloodshed or a peace treaty. Going in to peace treaty doesn't mean Muawiya was good and better and certainly doesn't prove that. Use your senses.
I don't know why I'm wasting my time here, but don't you see how you didn't address his point? He was talking about how Imam Hassan عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه gave up his leadership position to someone who is not an infallible Imam despite being an infallible Imam himself (according to you). It has nothing to do with who is "good and better" as there is a consensus among Muslims that Imam Hassan عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه is much greater than Muawiyah. I think you knew that was the argument, but so you can feel better, decided to attack a strawman.
Prediction: you will not address this.
Ali was the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time. We know that but we can't criticise and condemn, deny and reject those who opposed the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the and the Ulul Amre of the time.
We do criticize them and consider them to be in error in this situation. The questions then become: 1) are they worthy of la'nah because of this? 2) Does this make Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه as well as 11 of his progeny infallible imams?
Prediction: you won't answer either question.
Muawiya didn't accept legitimate Caliphate of Ali how do you expect Muawiya to accept the legitimate Caliphate of Hassan the 5th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time 😊
This is you Nizam of Caliphate which you so fiercely defend from Saqifa but after Usman you throw it in doubt. 😆
DOUBLE STANDARDS 😆
We don't throw it in doubt, Muawiyah was wrong in how he handled the situation. In fact, I can understand why some people doubt his faith. Nevertheless, I don't see how that helps your case that Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه was an infallible Imam. In fact, making takfeer of him only hurts your cause, are you saying they made peace with a fasiq kafir all in the name of unity? Then why don't you guys do that today? LOL
Prediction: no response to this point.
-
No it doesn't. I've said and put plenty forward on Saqifa. By all means do jump in if you feel like you have it. I don't think you've got what it takes to discuss and debate. That's why you come out with taunts and tantrums. And here's a few faces for you since you seem to be obsessed with them. 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
Awww what’s up? You spat your dummy out?😂😂👍😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
You a debator hahahahaha😂😂😂😂😂😂👍👍👍👍 good one 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
This debator for the life of Shiites cannot even answer a clear question of providing clear verses for divine leadership ithna ashari style.......yet and he classes himself as a debator.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👍😂😂👍👍👍😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😝
D E B A T O R😂😂😂😂👍😂👍
-
Awww what’s up? You spat your dummy out?😂😂👍😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
You a debator hahahahaha😂😂😂😂😂😂👍👍👍👍 good one 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
This debator for the life of Shiites cannot even answer a clear question of providing clear verses for divine leadership ithna ashari style.......yet and he classes himself as a debator.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👍😂😂👍👍👍😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😝
D E B A T O R😂😂😂😂👍😂👍
You sound like a 9 year old 😆 You really show you don't have what it takes.
-
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته يا أمين, long time no speak :)
I don't know why I'm wasting my time here, but don't you see how you didn't address his point? He was talking about how Imam Hassan عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه gave up his leadership position to someone who is not an infallible Imam despite being an infallible Imam himself (according to you). It has nothing to do with who is "good and better" as there is a consensus among Muslims that Imam Hassan عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه is much greater than Muawiyah. I think you knew that was the argument, but so you can feel better, decided to attack a strawman.
Prediction: you will not address this.
We do criticize them and consider them to be in error in this situation. The questions then become: 1) are they worthy of la'nah because of this? 2) Does this make Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه as well as 11 of his progeny infallible imams?
Prediction: you won't answer either question.
We don't throw it in doubt, Muawiyah was wrong in how he handled the situation. In fact, I can understand why some people doubt his faith. Nevertheless, I don't see how that helps your case that Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه was an infallible Imam. In fact, making takfeer of him only hurts your cause, are you saying they made peace with a fasiq kafir all in the name of unity? Then why don't you guys do that today? LOL
Prediction: no response to this point.
Salaam. I don't know how many times I need to address this. Muawiyah had influence and connections right from the very start. First as Mushrik and Kafirs of Mecca in the early days of Islam. Bani Ummayah and especially the Abu Sufyaan clan and family.
After the demise of the Prophet s.a.w Muawiya served as govner under the first three Caliphs. That's a total of 25 years being part of Caliphate as a governor having areas and districts under his control. Here he build a considerable amount of wealth and influence. He had a lot of supporters.
When Ali got into authority Muawiya refused to recognize him. Muawiyah knew the influence, wealth and support he had otherwise he never would have challenged Ali. The conflict with Ali turned into a war consisting of 72 battles. What, lasting 1 to 2 years. That's a long time and a very long conflict with a loss of a lot of lives.
When Hassan got into authority Muawiya even refused to recognize him. Why? The prime excuse against Ali was bringing the killers of Usman to justice by handing them over to Muawiya. But what was Muawiyah's excuse for not recognising Hassan?
Anyways the conflict continued moving on to Hassan. Theu slims got tired and exhausted. And people were thinking of when this conflict is going to end. Hassan examined the situation and did the right thing by ending the conflict. There were two things, either continue with the conflict or put an end to it.
A arrogant and stubborn man would continue with the conflict regardless of the consequences. And Muawiyya did and still would. The wise and intelligent examined and analysed the situation and decided to end the conflict. Infallibility doesn't mean you are better so you should stick to your guns. It means doing what is right and necessary.
As far as Muawiya goes, money talks and wealth counts. He used it to his disposal.
"We do criticize them and consider them to be in error in this situation. The questions then become: 1) are they worthy of la'nah because of this? 2) Does this make Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه as well as 11 of his progeny infallible imams?"
Do you know the meaning of la'nah? Is sending la'nah wrong and haraam? As far as infallibility is concerned why does the conflict restrict someone from being infallible? Or looking at the circumstances and analysing the situation and making a decision on a broader basis, why would this effect your infallibility?
"are you saying they made peace with a fasiq kafir all in the name of unity?"
Muawiyah wasn't a Kafir. It was a conflict between the Muslims and caused by the Muslims. Making peace for the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims is no loss but gain.
"Then why don't you guys do that today? LOL"
😊😊😊 That's precisely and exactly what we're doing 😊😊😊 Take a look at around. Shias have never turned towards violence and threatening behaviour just to have their demands met or to overthrow a Sunni government. 😊
-
Did he have a choice? It was either continuous conflict resulting to more bloodshed or a peace treaty.
If as an "infallible" Imam with the Caliphate in his possession still leaves Imam Hassan (ra) without a choice (or helpless) then he is not fit to be anyone's Imam, last of them would be me. That is the thesis I am supporting. Your "infallible" Imams (ra) were rendered helpless with or without power. What good are such guides?
And what bloodshed did Imam Hassan (ra) prevent? If anything, his decision (to give Caliphate to Muawiya) was the reason why Yazeed was unleashed upon the Ummah leading to Imam Hussain's (ra) death.
Going in to peace treaty doesn't mean Muawiya was good and better and certainly doesn't prove that. Use your senses.
Imam Hassan (ra), in our worldview, is better than Muawiya. Your theology, on the other hand, does not allow for him to relegate himself so that Muawiya could rule the Muslims.
Ali was the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time. We know that but we can't criticise and condemn, deny and reject those who opposed the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the and the Ulul Amre of the time.
Imam Hassan (ra), according to some scholars and me, is the 5th Rightly Guided Caliph. If he makes way for Muawiya to be the leader, I will not criticize or condemn Muawiya. Doing so would be putting our whims above Imam Hassan's (ra) intelligence. We have more respect for Imam Hassan (ra) than all the Shias from conception of Shiaism till the realization of the non-existent "cave man".
Muawiya didn't accept legitimate Caliphate of Ali how do you expect Muawiya to accept the legitimate Caliphate of Hassan the 5th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time 😊
According to you, Muawiya rejected both the Caliphates of Imam Ali (ra) and Imam Hassan (ra); one fought Muawiya and the other surrendered his "Divine Right". Who was right? Father or son?
I'VE DONE IT QUITE A FEW TIMES NOW 😊
Your excuses do not fit within your theology. They actually negate your beliefs.
Don't say that. We are talking about ALI the most feared and brave warrior. His performance in the battlefield is legendary where as the performance of your beloved individuals is also known and seen running up the hills and mountains in the battle of Uhad when the going got tough. 😊
Imam Ali (ra), according to your beliefs, did not bat an eyelid when his wife was attacked and dragged in public. As for running performances, no one can outmatch the one running for over 1000 years. Why is he running and hiding? Because he fears for his life, according to your books of aqeedah! Awww, one scaredy cat he is!
I STRONGLY DISAGREE. Ali had a choice just as we all do. Ali made the right choice.
Went door-to-door asking for help but no one helped him. Fail! Watched his wife take a beating. Fail!
-
You sound like a 9 year old 😆 You really show you don't have what it takes.
What’s up? Don’t like it now do we?😂😂😂😂😂
Ok this 9 year old has proved shura from Quran and an intelligent adult like yourself with the Shiite aql...........Can’t do the same for divine Imamate.😉👍
Intelligent E Shiite 😊
-
Saqifa gives E Shiite nightmares.
The guy comes up with promotion and he can’t answer his own theory😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Come on icepop 😊
-
😊😊😊 That's precisely and exactly what we're doing 😊😊😊 Take a look at around. Shias have never turned towards violence and threatening behaviour just to have their demands met or to overthrow a Sunni government. 😊
What a lying deceiving little rat you are.
Shiites never turn towards violence??? Arrogant E Shiite!
What happened to Safavids? They didn’t turn violent for their demands did they?
Iraq helping the Americans and creating your own militias in Syria and Iraq to OVERTHROW a government and militias being created to have your demands met.
Suicide truck bombers, believed to be Hezbollah, kill 241 American servicemen in Beirut.
The media spectacle of Hezbollah’s suicide bombing quickly inspired other groups in Lebanon, including Christian and secular militant groups, to try it as well. The number of attacks grew rapidly in the mid 1980s before declining near the end of the decade.
In 1993, Palestinian groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad began using suicide bombers against Israeli targets in an effort to derail the Oslo-Cairo peace process, then taking place between the Israeli government and the PLO. Hezbollah trained many of the radicals in how to use suicide attacks from late 1992 to early 1993.
I could carry on
It was started by you shiites you taught the Sunnis about killing yourself and your enemy together.
Shiites are the ones who created their own sect with their own set of ideas and were the first suicide bombers.👍😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
-
Salaam.
Just as a reminder, Allah سبحانه وتعالى says in Surat an-Nisaa':
When you are greeted with a greeting, greet in return with what is better than it, or (at least) return it equally.
The very least is try to return my greeting with something similar بارك الله فيك.
I don't know how many times I need to address this. Muawiyah had influence and connections right from the very start. First as Mushrik and Kafirs of Mecca in the early days of Islam. Bani Ummayah and especially the Abu Sufyaan clan and family.
You didn't need to address this as this is well known.
After the demise of the Prophet s.a.w Muawiya served as govner under the first three Caliphs. That's a total of 25 years being part of Caliphate as a governor having areas and districts under his control. Here he build a considerable amount of wealth and influence. He had a lot of supporters.
That's actually not true as he wasn't a governor under Abu Bakr, but no problem, we still agree...
When Ali got into authority Muawiya refused to recognize him. Muawiyah knew the influence, wealth and support he had otherwise he never would have challenged Ali. The conflict with Ali turned into a war consisting of 72 battles. What, lasting 1 to 2 years. That's a long time and a very long conflict with a loss of a lot of lives.
No doubt he had a lot of support and influence, but not as much as Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه. But lets see where you're going with this...
When Hassan got into authority Muawiya even refused to recognize him. Why? The prime excuse against Ali was bringing the killers of Usman to justice by handing them over to Muawiya. But what was Muawiyah's excuse for not recognising Hassan?
Anyways the conflict continued moving on to Hassan. Theu slims got tired and exhausted. And people were thinking of when this conflict is going to end. Hassan examined the situation and did the right thing by ending the conflict. There were two things, either continue with the conflict or put an end to it.
This is why Imam Hassan عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه is considered one of the greatest Muslims off all-time without the need to even mention that he was a Sahabi, a member of Ahl al-Bayt and one of the Two Sayyids of Ahl Al-Jannah. This was even prophesied by the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم; that he would bring piece between two great groups of Muslims رضي الله عنه وأرضاه.
A arrogant and stubborn man would continue with the conflict regardless of the consequences. And Muawiyya did and still would. The wise and intelligent examined and analysed the situation and decided to end the conflict. Infallibility doesn't mean you are better so you should stick to your guns. It means doing what is right and necessary.
As far as Muawiya goes, money talks and wealth counts. He used it to his disposal.
Umm... I've read what you wrote several times, but how does it address ANYTHING that has been said to you by me or anyone else? So an infallible Imam gave up his infallible position to a fallible fasiq? The Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم went through the same, yet you never saw him give up his position as a Messenger to anyone else or even leave it as a matter of debate regardless of what might have happened. I'm afraid you haven't addressed anything and only dug yourself into a bigger hole, because there is no doubt Ali and al-Hassan رضي الله عنهما had WAY MORE support than al-Hussayn رضي الله عنه, and yet al-Hassan made peace and al-Hussayn fought. Care to address that? Or are you just going to go on an irrelevant rant?
"We do criticize them and consider them to be in error in this situation. The questions then become: 1) are they worthy of la'nah because of this? 2) Does this make Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه as well as 11 of his progeny infallible imams?"
Do you know the meaning of la'nah? Is sending la'nah wrong and haraam? As far as infallibility is concerned why does the conflict restrict someone from being infallible? Or looking at the circumstances and analysing the situation and making a decision on a broader basis, why would this effect your infallibility?
As always, since you are not able to answer, you respond with questions. I know what la'nah means and I don't believe it is haraam (outright), there, I answered your question. Now answer mine, was what they did worthy of la'nah?
The second question again, I'll answer, no it does not effect their infallibility, but in what way does it prove it? People analyze situations all the time, how does that make someone infallible? That was my question. You knew what you said was irrelevant, so you decided to respond with a question to derail the discussion.
Muawiyah wasn't a Kafir. It was a conflict between the Muslims and caused by the Muslims. Making peace for the welfare of Islam and the benefit of the Muslims is no loss but gain.
Muawiyah wasn't a kafir according to 12er theology? He fought the Imam, took his position, changed Islam etc and he's still a Muslim? I guess somehow this peace treaty "saved" Islam by confirming for the overwhelming majority of Muslims from that time on that Imam Hassan رضي الله عنه was not an infallible Imam and allowed "Sunnis" to dominate the image of Islam, be the sole relayers of the Qur'an, Sunnah, Arabic language, Imam Ali رضي الله عنه's sermons. Amazing the length you'll go to to convince yourself.
😊😊😊 That's precisely and exactly what we're doing 😊😊😊 Take a look at around. Shias have never turned towards violence and threatening behaviour just to have their demands met or to overthrow a Sunni government. 😊
LOL, I can't believe you can say that with a straight (or smiley) face. This level of ignorance is almost hard to believe. He's sitting here arguing about Sunni/Shi'a theology and telling me that today, he is behaving like Imams Ali and Hassan رضي الله عنهما. The only thing more absurd about that, is that I'm sitting here taking time out of my day to respond to you.
-
i think nothing more needs to be said after watching this, Khalas!
-
The title of this thread is,
WHO KILLED HUSSAIN RA?
The answer is the MUSLIM CALIPH ordered his killing and the governor of Kufa Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad carried out the order. Hussain was killed by a battalion from the Muslim army.
DIGEST IT and then get on with it. There is no point in trying to twist and turn things around to hide the bitter truth.
-
The title of this thread is,
WHO KILLED HUSSAIN RA?
The answer is the SHIITES OF KUFA called him to his killing and the governor of Kufa Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad carried out the order. Hussain was killed by a battalion from the Syrian army, while the kufan SHIITES were at home or on the sidelines......WATCHING!
DIGEST IT and then get on with it. There is no point in trying to twist and turn things around to hide the bitter truth.
-
😊 Ok. And you've forgot to mention what was the faith of the battalion from the Syrian army? And the governor of Kufa Ubaydallah ibn Ziyaad, what was his faith? Was the governor and the battalion Shia as well? 😊 Believe me I wouldn't be surprised if you said yes 😀
And you haven’t mentioned anything about the Muslims, where were they? And where was the Sunnis hiding at the time? In Madinah? 😀 If this is how you want to behave and play then it's fine with me. Probably this is your level.
-
Lol 😂 and what did you answer? Did you answer them questions you put to me yourself? NO!
You know deep down it was the kufan Shiites that wrote letters practically begging Him to come and help them so they will unite behind Him ra.......Sunnis said don’t go it’s a TRAP.........the cowardness of the kufans was well known and it’s what happened.
The kufans undid the divinity out of the imam😂😂
-
Lol 😂 and what did you answer? Did you answer them questions you put to me yourself? NO!
You know deep down it was the kufan Shiites that wrote letters practically begging Him to come and help them so they will unite behind Him ra.......Sunnis said don’t go it’s a TRAP.........the cowardness of the kufans was well known and it’s what happened.
The kufans undid the divinity out of the imam😂😂
Why did the Kufans right to him all of a sudden? What was the reason for those letters? And the Kufans became Shia all of a sudden just because they wrote to Hussain? 😊 And which Shia did they become? I know multiple questions really kick the living daylights out of you. But who cares as long as I've got you on the run.
The Sunnis of Madina said "don't go it's a trap"? Well after the incident of Karbala Yazeed most definitely turned towards Madina. He didn't spare those Madanites. 😊 The Madanites should have gone with Hussain and fought as true warriors rather than holding back and getting it in the neck. What do you think? 😊