The reason, Youpunctured left this narration was because, this narration in no way undermines the bravery of Sheikhain. And the article you referred focus on answering those reports which undermines the bravery of Sheikhein, and since this narration was not of this kind, then there was no need to refute it. So you bringing it up, shows nothing but your desperation and nothing else.
The narration is substantial proof against the leadership ability and bravery of the Khalifatayn. Youpunctured should have allowed their readers to note that there is a reliable version of the narration present. There was no reference to this made, and even an attempt to explain that even if the companions accused them of cowardice, there was no harm in it since this behaviour (to be frank) was common among them. As an objective reader, i do not really care what the others accused Abu Bakr or Umar of. The most significant part is the fact Abu Bakr went first, but was unsuccessful. Umar ibn al-Khattab went second, but was unsuccessful. Had Allah (swt) wanted, he could have brought victory through either of them, yet the man to bring victory was none other than Ali ibn Abi Talib. Put side not being successful, he slaughtered Harith, and then Marhab, and then led the charge so that the Muslims were successful.
As said earlier, the hadeeth of Musnad Ahmad, in no way questions the bravery of Shaikhain. Anyone blessed with wisdom reads the hadeeth will reach to this conclusion. So, its an cunning attempt to claim that, the hadeeth is against bravery of Shekhein, because the hadeeth of Musnad just states that they didn't succeed in gaining victory, without any additional comments. Hence, Failing to gain victory in no way undermines the bravery of person. Its pure stupidity to claim so, hence youpucturedtheark was right in leaving this narration out, as it had nothing to do with bravery subject, as was the subject of that article.
But then you bring another point, irrelevant to the topic of youpuncturedtheark, that it questions the leadership of Abu Bakr(ra) and Umar(ra), but this again is due to your inexperience and ignorance. Leadership is a pretty vast field dealing with different aspects, but I assume you meant Military leadership in specific. In that case, I would say that Abu bakr(ra) and Umar(ra) were never known for their military leadership or commander-ship, nor did the Sunnis ever claim that they were excellent military leaders, it seems you made a wrong assumption. Nevertheless, a military leader failing to gain a victory is never criticized by civilized people. If the foolish standards which you made up are applied, then one could even claim that Zaid(ra), Jafar(ra), etc were incompetent leaders, since they weren't able to gain victory as leaders.
Narrated Anas: The Prophet (ﷺ) had informed the people of the martyrdom of Zaid, Ja`far and Ibn Rawaha before the news of their death reached. The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Zaid took the flag (as the commander of the army) and was martyred, then Ja`far took it and was martyred, and then Ibn Rawaha took it and was martyred." At that time the Prophet's eyes were shedding tears. He added, "Then the flag was taken by a Sword amongst the Swords of Allah (i.e. Khalid) and Allah made them (i.e. the Muslims) victorious."[Sahih al-Bukhari 4262].
1. Abu Bakr, and Umar had the same soldiers as Ali.
2. Both went, one after the other, but retreated in defeat.
3. Yet, Ali ibn Abi Talib went and produced what became several famous victories over some of the most eminent warriors.
a. Jafar(ra) and Zaid(ra) had the same soldiers as Khalid bin Waleeed(ra).
b. Both got leadership one after the other, but the conditions of Muslim army didn't progress they were losing and eventually both got martyred.
c. Yet, Khalid bin Waleed(ra) got the leadership and produced what became one of the most remarkable victory of Islam over one of the great enemy army of that time.
As i noted, there is going to be a debate on what to grade the tradition (That was regarded weak). There are principles in Hadith whereby a weak tradition can be elevated to a category of Hasan one if it also comes through other routes that may be weak. I have left that for further research because this particular narration was never what i class as Hujjah.
Not necessarily. We have ample of evidences when Muhadditeen weakened reports which had several weak chains. One such example are the reports about Rafidah being Mushrikeen, and Prophet(saws) commanding them to fight. And many more.
I am not new to Hadith sciences, and never did i at any point claim that was Tawtheeq. I referred to it for general reference, so that people may know this is not a random individual, but one considered a Fuqaha. As for the bearing on the actual reliability of the tradition , that is limited. I am quite aware of what Tawtheeq is.
There are many narrators who were praised for their piety and fiqh, but they were weakened a Hadeeth narrators. This isn't a rare case.
The tradition are not entirely different, given that the main aspect of the tradition is that :
1. Abu Bakr went, and retreated unsuccessfully.
2 Umar went, and retreated unsuccessfully.
3. Allah chose Ali ibn Abi Talib above both of them, blessed him, and promised the Muslims victory through him, when Abu Bakr and Umar had failed.
a. Jafar(ra) went and failed in achieving victory and was martyred.
b. Zaid(ra) went and failed in achieving victory and was martyred.
c. Allah granted victory to Khalid bin waleed(ra), above both of them, and granted victory to Muslims through him, when Zaid(ra) and Jafar(ra) had failed to gain victory.
You see, how foollish its looks if stupid standards are set to judge certain events? As I said before, Abu bakr(ra) and Umar(ra) were never known for their military leadership or commander-ship, nor did the Sunnis ever claim that they were excellent military leaders, but that doesn't mean they weren't brave. They were brave Muslims, and that has been attested by Ali(ra) himself, so you and your foolish standards are nothing and worth putting in thrash.
Moreover, if you want to know where Messenger of Allah(swt) chose Abubakr(ra) for leadership over Ali(ra) and other Sahaba(ra) is in leading the prayer in place of Prophet(saws), when prophet(saws) was ill.
then finished this off by lifting the entire gate of Khaybar with his own bare hands, which 44 men could not lift according to what is narrated in Ibn Ishaq and other sources.
Transcript: "It is during this expidition the famous incident we know happened. That Ali RAs sheild was knocked out, and Ali was left defenceless. So he went to the door of the fortress, and its a massive structure. And he used the entire door as a sheild for the remainder of the battle. And when it was over he threw it aside and Abu Rafi' the narrator said "seven of us tried to pick up the door but we couldn't" and there is no doubt this is a mini miracle given to Ali RA. Ali RA was a man whom Allah and His messenger loved and we too love him with a true love."
Thanks for bringing up this issue. You have set an example for the readers to see, how Shia fabricate things in their majalis. You mentioned the story of a door which 44(forty four) men couldn't left, but the (unreliable) referred you referred talks about 7(seven men). See how you people blow things out of proportion. You multiple the number present in the unreliable report some six times more. 7 X 6 = 42. LOL. And the irony is that you feel offended when I say these kind of fairy tales occur in your majalis, where as you yourself proved my words to be true. Praise be to Allah!
However, i can accept this view is not enough to consider the report reliable by the view of the Sunnis. However, i brought it forth to see it is widely narrated among them and not simply in the 'Majalis'.
LOL. Your majalis blew this unreliable report out of proportion, and increased the number six times more. From 7 to 44.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) knew that they would not succeed, and knew full well Allah had given him the news that Ali ibn Abi Talib would be the one who he would heal through a miracle, and unlike the Khalifatayn, would be successful and not return unless he was victorious.
These are baseless and unreal assumptions based on ignorance and corrupt beliefs. Prophet(saws) didn't know these things, similar to not knowing that Khalid bin Waleed(ra) would kill some innocent people. Like this one:
Narrated Ibn `Umar: The Prophet (ﷺ) sent (an army unit under the command of) Khalid bin Al-Walid to fight against the tribe of Bani Jadhima and those people could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna," but they said, "Saba'na! Saba'na! " Khalid kept on killing some of them and taking some others as captives, and he gave a captive to everyone of us and ordered everyone of us to kill his captive. I said, "By Allah, I shall not kill my captive and none of my companions shall kill his captive!" Then we mentioned that to the Prophet (ﷺ) and he said, "O Allah! I am free from what Khalid bin Al-Walid has done," and repeated it twice. [Sahih al-Bukhari 7189]
For those who hold the corrupt beliefs, then as per their logic, Prophet(saws) knew that some innocent people will be killed by Khalid bin Waleed(ra) erroneously, but he still appointed a leader and sent towards those people.(Ma'azAllah)
Admin note: Post edited to fix the quoting errors
80 Replies
18913 Views
November 07, 2015, 04:20:50 AM