Did the Sahabah All Fight Each Other?

[iceman]

Says you?

Why are you asking me?  lol, the sad part is that you brought up Uthman's (ra) wife and I proved to you how she was more brave than your version of Imam Ali (ra).  Don't run away from that point!

Your second and third Imams (ra) were also present.  Do you wish to drag them to court?

It is overdue so get to them now before you keep working down the rabbit hole.

Imam Hussain (ra) was killed and that is for sure.  Was it Murder?  Or was it manslaughter?  What makes you think it was murder and why?  Either answer and explain or keep running.

That is how easy it is to refute you, you spineless idiot, lol!  Replace names in your psychobabble diarrhea and let you see how idiotic your comments are.  However, it requires an ounce of shame and some brain, both of which you lack, to detect the idiocy.

If you assert, and you did, that you know Muawiya (better than your second Imam), you are therefore elevating your own intelligence above your 2nd "infallible" Imam's (ra)!

And your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra), possessing knowledge of the unseen, did not know this?  You do but not him?  Therefore, Imam Hassan (ra) was wrong (for making peace with Muawiya), if you say you are right.

It is not what I think, it is what you believe.  You cannot claim to know Imam Hassan (ra) and then paint an image of Muawiya any differently than known to Imam Hassan (ra).  If you do that, you are insinuating your Imam (ra) was an accomplice in all the crimes (actual and imaginary) committed by Muawiya, Yazeed, etc, all the while maintaining that the Imam (ra) is infallible and sinless.

I have no issues to take up with anyone.  It is you to explain how a mere mortal and vile individual, as per you, was able to overpower your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra), lol!

Oh, right!  If they were different, why was Imam Ali (ra) going door-to-door begging for his "right", according to you?

I read your nonsense!  Imam Hassan (ra) willingly stepped aside and handed the entire Ummah to a vicious person.  And you want me to believe that he was "Divinely Selected" to guide the Ummah?  How can such a man be my guide?  He sold the Ummah to Muawiya.  OR, you are completely mistaken.  It is the latter!

"Why are you asking me?  lol, the sad part is that you brought up Uthman's (ra) wife and I proved to you how she was more brave than your version of Imam Ali (ra).  Don't run away from that point!"

I brought up Usman's wife? Can you back this up?

"Your second and third Imams (ra) were also present.  Do you wish to drag them to court?"

Lets deal with who was present and witnessed the killing. One step at a time. Don't start running ahead with fright. Relax. Answer and address then by all means ask and question. Don't be a coward.

"It is overdue so get to them now before you keep working down the rabbit hole."

Who was the group from whom the killers were? Are you all of a sudden stuck?

"Imam Hussain (ra) was killed and that is for sure.  Was it Murder?  Or was it manslaughter?  What makes you think it was murder and why?  Either answer and explain or keep running."

Counter arguments can't protect you. If you can't answer then say so. We're dealing with the death of Usman. Don't derail the thread. Start another thread and I'll be more than happy to participate. I'm not a coward like you coming up and  hiding behind counter arguments.

"That is how easy it is to refute you, you spineless idiot, lol!  Replace names in your psychobabble diarrhea and let you see how idiotic your comments are.  However, it requires an ounce of shame and some brain, both of which you lack, to detect the idiocy."

You call me an idiot and you're the one who's behaving like one. You're a spineless coward hiding behind counter arguments.

"And your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra), possessing knowledge of the unseen, did not know this?  You do but not him?  Therefore, Imam Hassan (ra) was wrong (for making peace with Muawiya), if you say you are right."

Any comment on the point I made about Allah and Iblees based on your theory? 😊

"I have no issues to take up with anyone.  It is you to explain how a mere mortal and vile individual, as per you, was able to overpower your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra), lol!"

Overpower, I've already answered and explained this. Just as Iblees overpowered Allah (astaghfirullah) according to your theory😊

"If you assert, and you did, that you know Muawiya (better than your second Imam), you are therefore elevating your own intelligence above your 2nd "infallible" Imam's (ra)!"

Muawiyah 's actions tell exactly who he was. He used the killing of Usman to rebel against the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time. He used means of violence and threatening behaviour just to have his demands met. And you can run from this as much as you want but you can't hide from it.

And a bit more for you, what's the definition of a terrorist or a terrorist group? He or those who use means of violence and threatening behaviour just to have their demands met. Now find a corner and start to live silently.

"That is how easy it is to refute you, you spineless idiot, lol!  Replace names in your psychobabble diarrhea and let you see how idiotic your comments are.  However, it requires an ounce of shame and some brain, both of which you lack, to detect the idiocy."

Name the group from which the killers were. Or zip it.

"Oh, right!  If they were different, why was Imam Ali (ra) going door-to-door begging for his "right", according to you?"

Irrelevant to the thread. Start a different thread and ask. I'm not a coward like you. I will answer and address absolutely anything and everything you throw at me. Respect the rules of discussion. Stop bringing in material, making comments and asking questions which are irrelevant to the thread. 

[iceman]

Since Muslim 720 we're talking about Muawiya and his reign, any comment from you on the following;

Sunni scholar Ahmad ibn Hanbal writes in his famous collection of Hadtih: "Musnad" ""Abdullah bin Buraida said: 'I entered on Muawiya with my father, then he (Mu'awiya) made us sit on a mattress then he brought food to us and we ate, then he brought a drink to us, Muawiya drank it and then he offered that to my father, thus (my father) said: 'I never drank it since the messenger of Allah made it [that drink] Haram'...."

[iceman]

I should have known that dimwits cannot distinguish between rewards and mercy and actually being better (than someone else).  However, since you have turned this into a "who is better" discussion, allow me to kick you and Ijtaba in your nether regions, as was and will be the purpose of my posts, in case there is something there.

It was your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) who saw Muawiya to be better than him, a better fit for Caliphate, and therefore, he decided to forego his "Divinely Ordained Right" in favor of Muawiya.  So maybe not better than Usman (ra) but definitely better than your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra).

His wife was not attacked; his wife did not suffer a miscarriage; his wife did not have to beg for a piece of land while forgetting that she just had a miscarriage; there was no rope around his neck; he was not dragged out like an animal.....certainly received "rewards and mercy" in abundance compared to what you say happened to your "infallibles" (ra).

I honor him.  If honoring Muawiya causes you to lose sleep, may Allah's peace and blessings be upon Muawiya.  May his haters have week-long diarrhea!  Wait, his haters do have verbal diarrhea that dates back to 14 centuries ago, lol!

His wife was not attacked; his wife did not suffer a miscarriage; his wife did not have to beg for a piece of land while forgetting that she just had a miscarriage"

Who's wife was not? Are you talking about Muawiya or Usman?

[iceman]

Says you?

Why are you asking me?  lol, the sad part is that you brought up Uthman's (ra) wife and I proved to you how she was more brave than your version of Imam Ali (ra).  Don't run away from that point!

Your second and third Imams (ra) were also present.  Do you wish to drag them to court?

It is overdue so get to them now before you keep working down the rabbit hole.

Imam Hussain (ra) was killed and that is for sure.  Was it Murder?  Or was it manslaughter?  What makes you think it was murder and why?  Either answer and explain or keep running.

That is how easy it is to refute you, you spineless idiot, lol!  Replace names in your psychobabble diarrhea and let you see how idiotic your comments are.  However, it requires an ounce of shame and some brain, both of which you lack, to detect the idiocy.

If you assert, and you did, that you know Muawiya (better than your second Imam), you are therefore elevating your own intelligence above your 2nd "infallible" Imam's (ra)!

And your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra), possessing knowledge of the unseen, did not know this?  You do but not him?  Therefore, Imam Hassan (ra) was wrong (for making peace with Muawiya), if you say you are right.

It is not what I think, it is what you believe.  You cannot claim to know Imam Hassan (ra) and then paint an image of Muawiya any differently than known to Imam Hassan (ra).  If you do that, you are insinuating your Imam (ra) was an accomplice in all the crimes (actual and imaginary) committed by Muawiya, Yazeed, etc, all the while maintaining that the Imam (ra) is infallible and sinless.

I have no issues to take up with anyone.  It is you to explain how a mere mortal and vile individual, as per you, was able to overpower your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra), lol!

Oh, right!  If they were different, why was Imam Ali (ra) going door-to-door begging for his "right", according to you?

I read your nonsense!  Imam Hassan (ra) willingly stepped aside and handed the entire Ummah to a vicious person.  And you want me to believe that he was "Divinely Selected" to guide the Ummah?  How can such a man be my guide?  He sold the Ummah to Muawiya.  OR, you are completely mistaken.  It is the latter!

"Why are you asking me?  lol, Why are you asking me?  lol, the sad part is that you brought up Uthman's (ra) wife and I proved to you how she was more brave than your version of Imam Ali (ra).  Don't run away from that point!and I proved to you how she was more brave than your version of Imam Ali (ra).  Don't run away from that point"

Note this bit of yours "the sad part is that you brought up Uthman's (ra) wife"

DID I? ARE YOU SURE? Refer to post #75 of yours. And below is a quote from it.

"If we accept your worldview then Uthman's (ra) wife was far more brave than Imam Ali (ra).  When Uthman (ra) was being attacked, his wife brought her hands between Uthman (ra) and the swords and in the process, she lost some fingers.  Imam Ali (ra), on the other hand, was a mere spectator when his wife was being attacked."

So who exactly brought up Usman's wife? Honestly your lies as well as twist and turns make me sick.

[muslim720]

I brought up Usman's wife? Can you back this up?

For certain I can back up my claim!  If I were to adopt your beliefs, I cannot help but concede that Uthman's wife (may Allah be pleased with her and her husband) was more brave than Imam Ali (ra).  I will not entertain your red herrings.  I will hit where it hurts

Lets deal with who was present and witnessed the killing. One step at a time. Don't start running ahead with fright. Relax. Answer and address then by all means ask and question. Don't be a coward.

When you believe your own "infallible" Imam (ra) did not move a muscle in response to the onslaught his wife (ra) faced, calling someone "coward" makes you an object of mockery.  However, you gave precedence to those who were "present" before those who "witnessed" the killing.  Therefore, we have to put Imam Hassan (ra) and Imam Hussain (ra) in the witness box as well.

Who was the group from whom the killers were? Are you all of a sudden stuck?

The rebels!

Counter arguments can't protect you. If you can't answer then say so.

You could have said it was an idiotic request but you won't because I showed you how stupid you sound.  And not just on certain days but always!

You call me an idiot and you're the one who's behaving like one. You're a spineless coward hiding behind counter arguments.

From your level of frustration, I am convinced that you now see how stupid you sound.  Remember, I was only putting your own request in front of you by replacing one name with another. 

Any comment on the point I made about Allah and Iblees based on your theory? 😊

I have no qualms with how Allah (swt) dealt with Iblees, nor is it the topic of discussion.  You, on the other hand, ascribe infallibility to your Imams (ra) but refuse to abide by their decisions, such as entrusting Muawiya with the affairs of the Ummah.

If Muawiya was a ruthless killer who was blinded by his love for dunya, why would an "infallible" Imam (ra) make him in charge of the Ummah?  Maybe Imam Hassan (ra) secretly wished for the destruction of the Ummah and therefore Islam?

Overpower, I've already answered and explained this. Just as Iblees overpowered Allah (astaghfirullah) according to your theory😊

Certainly, Muawiya overpowered your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) and took his "Divinely Ordained Right" from him.  And he ruled with swag and enjoyed life.  Didn't get killed, didn't witness the slaughter of his family members.  Lived it up!  Your "infallibles" (ra) could not!  Cry me a river!

Muawiyah 's actions tell exactly who he was. He used the killing of Usman to rebel against the 4th rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time. He used means of violence and threatening behaviour just to have his demands met. And you can run from this as much as you want but you can't hide from it.

For the tenth time, why would your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) trust such a man with the lives and affairs of the Ummah?  And you can run from this as much as you want but you can't hide from it.  It burns you every day to think that such a man overpowered your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) and all you can do is cry about it.

And a bit more for you, what's the definition of a terrorist or a terrorist group?

An intellectual terrorist would be your seniors and scholars who hold your brains hostage by preaching some of the most stupid theories.  Another red herring, lol!

Irrelevant to the thread. Start a different thread and ask. I'm not a coward like you. I will answer and address absolutely anything and everything you throw at me. Respect the rules of discussion. Stop bringing in material, making comments and asking questions which are irrelevant to the thread. 

You can say what you want but your first "infallible" Imam (ra) went door-to-door begging for support to free the Caliphate for himself from the grip of Abu Bakr (ra).  Why would I need to start a new thread for it when Shias believe this?  lol!

Since Muslim 720 we're talking about Muawiya and his reign, any comment from you on the following;

Sunni scholar Ahmad ibn Hanbal writes in his famous collection of Hadtih: "Musnad" ""Abdullah bin Buraida said: 'I entered on Muawiya with my father, then he (Mu'awiya) made us sit on a mattress then he brought food to us and we ate, then he brought a drink to us, Muawiya drank it and then he offered that to my father, thus (my father) said: 'I never drank it since the messenger of Allah made it [that drink] Haram'...."

Now watch how your own request will be come back to hurt you.

I am willing to assume and concede that this drink was alcohol (though it was not)! 

Why would your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) hand the Ummah over to an alcohol-imbibing man?  Therefore, playing by your standards, we should all condemn Imam Hassan (ra) for all the Muslims drinking alcohol, until Judgment Day, because he (Imam Hassan) made a drunkard a leader and a role model for us (instead of ruling uprightly himself).  After all, it was Imam Hassan's (ra) only task to rule and guide the Muslims but he outsourced the task to a drunkard.

Hence, all the misguidance in the Ummah can be blamed on Imam Hassan (ra).  SALAVAAT!!!

Who's wife was not? Are you talking about Muawiya or Usman?

Wow, dementia.  Did they rain bricks on your head this Muharram, lol?

[Mythbuster1]

Lol imam Hassan ra gave up divine khilafat to a ........DRUNKARD?!?!?

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

This just gets better😊

[muslim720]

Lol imam Hassan ra gave up divine khilafat to a ........DRUNKARD?!?!?

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

This just gets better😊

Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,

I wonder at what point would they stop and realize that everything they say is a spit that lands right back on their own faces.

[Mythbuster1]

Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,

I wonder at what point would they stop and realize that everything they say is a spit that lands right back on their own faces.

W alaikum asalam, they have dug a hole so deep that they can’t even get out of it lol.

The more questions asked the more stupid the whole concept of divine Imamate and the history according to them is, I mean you won’t see ANY of the rashidoon Khalifa give up leadership to a drunkard or killer or a money hungry despotic leader.........Yet the divine imam did do exactly that!! He couldn’t muster enough support even Allah swt left him high and dry and let muawiya ra rule.

God must not like shiites for He doesn’t back up their imams or their statuses clear from His book that are higher than prophecy.

A status HIGHER than a prophet and yet the imam gave it to a killer a drunkard astaghfirullah.

A lie never sticks, especially one with a divine nature 😊

Saqifa has got him and he knows it😉

[muslim720]

A status HIGHER than a prophet and yet the imam gave it to a killer a drunkard astaghfirullah.

A lie never sticks, especially one with a divine nature 😊

Saqifa has got him and he knows it😉

Nothing adds up!  Imam Ali (ra) fought Muawiya, Imam Hassan (ra) made peace with him and Imam Hussain (ra) went to dethrone Yazeed.  Between father and two sons, you see three contradictory positions that cannot be reconciled unless you adopt the true Sunnah and realize that hindsight is 20/20 (as it has already been mentioned).

Even if Muawiya did not know the killers of Uthman (ra) and it was his excuse to wage war against Imam Ali (ra), why would Imam Hassan (ra) entrust such a man with the lives and affairs of Muslims?

Even if Muawiya was drinking a forbidden drink - let us pretend alcohol, hell, even blood - why would an "infallible" Imam (ra) step down from his post for such a person to come to power?

It is about time Shias start blaming Imam Hassan (ra) for all of Yazeed's crimes like they pin all the zina (committed around on the world) on Umar (ra) for maintaining the Prophet's (saw) declaration that mutah is haraam.

[iceman]

Nothing adds up!  Imam Ali (ra) fought Muawiya, Imam Hassan (ra) made peace with him and Imam Hussain (ra) went to dethrone Yazeed.  Between father and two sons, you see three contradictory positions that cannot be reconciled unless you adopt the true Sunnah and realize that hindsight is 20/20 (as it has already been mentioned).

Even if Muawiya did not know the killers of Uthman (ra) and it was his excuse to wage war against Imam Ali (ra), why would Imam Hassan (ra) entrust such a man with the lives and affairs of Muslims?

Even if Muawiya was drinking a forbidden drink - let us pretend alcohol, hell, even blood - why would an "infallible" Imam (ra) step down from his post for such a person to come to power?

It is about time Shias start blaming Imam Hassan (ra) for all of Yazeed's crimes like they pin all the zina (committed around on the world) on Umar (ra) for maintaining the Prophet's (saw) declaration that mutah is haraam.

The reason why nothing adds up for you is because of your lack of age, experience  (in discussions) and also lack of knowledge and information.

We are all born and raised with a mindset put it is down to us to develop an open and free mind. You are not willing. You think and behave based on the enmity you have. You respond based on retaliation and scoring. Logic and reason doesn't mean anything to you. And you aren't willing to get to know and understand.

Imam Ali didn't fight Muawiya, he refused allegiance to Ali and wasn't willing to accept him as Caliph. He used the killing of Usman as an excuse to refuse allegiance. You need an excuse because no one comes clean or is that honest about themselves.

What was the reason behind Safeen. Muawiyah accused Ali of having a hand in the killing. Ali claimed he was absolutely innocent of the matter.  One was the rightly guided Caliph of the Muslims and the Ulul Amre of the time. The other used his influence and connections which he had built by being a govner during the reign of the previous Caliphs.

Ali did what was right and necessary at the time. Hassan analysed the situation through history and learned that Muawiya will not give up or change his ways. He did what was right and necessary at the time based on circumstances.

Hussain refused allegiance to Yazeed because of him Tampering with Islam and the corruption he was bringing about within. He did what was right and necessary at the time. Hussain didn't go to dethrone Yazeed but was told about the developing situation and was invited by the Kufans.history is there. Read and learn to get tout know.

What is the true Sunnah? Tell me, I really want to know.Hindsight 20/20? Excuse me, we don't use such double standards.

 "why would Imam Hassan (ra) entrust such a man with the lives and affairs of Muslims?"

Did he have a choice? If yes, then what choice was that, continue to fight Muawiya  or end the bloodshed? It was down to the Ummah. Don't blame him for the division that the Ummah caused and brought upon themselves. It's been 1400 years and still the Ummah is divided over those historical matters and can't gather on one page. And you expect them to.....

"It is about time Shias start blaming Imam Hassan (ra) for all of Yazeed's crimes like they pin all the zina (committed around on the world) on Umar (ra) for maintaining the Prophet's (saw) declaration that mutah is haraam."

We don't play the blame game or discuss based on division and enmity. We look at realty and facts. Logic and reason is what we go by.

[iceman]

Lol imam Hassan ra gave up divine khilafat to a ........DRUNKARD?!?!?

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

This just gets better😊

No he didn't. The Ummah decided what they wanted and who they preferred.😊

"W alaikum asalam, they have dug a hole so deep that they can’t even get out of it lol."

The Muslim Ummah dug a hole for themselves and are paying the price for it today.😊 You don't accept Imamah, that is fine. Where is your Caliphate? 😊 You need to give it a rest.

"God must not like shiites for He doesn’t back up their imams or their statuses clear from His book that are higher than prophecy."

You seem to be obsessed with worldly power and status. That is success and glory according to you.

"Saqifa has got him and he knows it😉"

Saqifa got the Ummah and within fifty years of history Muslims fought Muslims and shed their blood. That’s what Saqifa brought.

"Allah swt left him high and dry and let muawiya ra rule."

Based on your theory and thought Allah also left Bani Adam high and dry and left the fate of mankind in the hands of Satan. 😊

[iceman]

For certain I can back up my claim!  If I were to adopt your beliefs, I cannot help but concede that Uthman's wife (may Allah be pleased with her and her husband) was more brave than Imam Ali (ra).  I will not entertain your red herrings.  I will hit where it hurts

When you believe your own "infallible" Imam (ra) did not move a muscle in response to the onslaught his wife (ra) faced, calling someone "coward" makes you an object of mockery.  However, you gave precedence to those who were "present" before those who "witnessed" the killing.  Therefore, we have to put Imam Hassan (ra) and Imam Hussain (ra) in the witness box as well.

The rebels!

You could have said it was an idiotic request but you won't because I showed you how stupid you sound.  And not just on certain days but always!

From your level of frustration, I am convinced that you now see how stupid you sound.  Remember, I was only putting your own request in front of you by replacing one name with another. 

I have no qualms with how Allah (swt) dealt with Iblees, nor is it the topic of discussion.  You, on the other hand, ascribe infallibility to your Imams (ra) but refuse to abide by their decisions, such as entrusting Muawiya with the affairs of the Ummah.

If Muawiya was a ruthless killer who was blinded by his love for dunya, why would an "infallible" Imam (ra) make him in charge of the Ummah?  Maybe Imam Hassan (ra) secretly wished for the destruction of the Ummah and therefore Islam?

Certainly, Muawiya overpowered your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) and took his "Divinely Ordained Right" from him.  And he ruled with swag and enjoyed life.  Didn't get killed, didn't witness the slaughter of his family members.  Lived it up!  Your "infallibles" (ra) could not!  Cry me a river!

For the tenth time, why would your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) trust such a man with the lives and affairs of the Ummah?  And you can run from this as much as you want but you can't hide from it.  It burns you every day to think that such a man overpowered your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) and all you can do is cry about it.

An intellectual terrorist would be your seniors and scholars who hold your brains hostage by preaching some of the most stupid theories.  Another red herring, lol!

You can say what you want but your first "infallible" Imam (ra) went door-to-door begging for support to free the Caliphate for himself from the grip of Abu Bakr (ra).  Why would I need to start a new thread for it when Shias believe this?  lol!

Now watch how your own request will be come back to hurt you.

I am willing to assume and concede that this drink was alcohol (though it was not)! 

Why would your 2nd "infallible" Imam (ra) hand the Ummah over to an alcohol-imbibing man?  Therefore, playing by your standards, we should all condemn Imam Hassan (ra) for all the Muslims drinking alcohol, until Judgment Day, because he (Imam Hassan) made a drunkard a leader and a role model for us (instead of ruling uprightly himself).  After all, it was Imam Hassan's (ra) only task to rule and guide the Muslims but he outsourced the task to a drunkard.

Hence, all the misguidance in the Ummah can be blamed on Imam Hassan (ra).  SALAVAAT!!!

Wow, dementia.  Did they rain bricks on your head this Muharram, lol?

Who brought up Usman's wife, me or you Then why did you accuse me? At least accept your fault of throwing accusations around based on lies. Yes she was so brave that she refused to bring the killers to justice by remaining quiet and silent. No statement or effort from her what so ever.

"When you believe your own "infallible" Imam (ra) did not move a muscle in response to the onslaught his wife (ra)"

When and where did I say this was part of my belief? 😊 You can't back up anything, can you? You talk wind out of enmity. Save yourself from this disease.

"Therefore, we have to put Imam Hassan (ra) and Imam Hussain (ra) in the witness box as well."

By all means but deal with one thing at a time. First Usman's wife who you brought up first.😊

"The rebels!"

😀 Come on. You need to do better than that. You need to either name people or the exact group you think was responsible. Otherwise you're a joke. So who sounds stupid now.

" I was only putting your own request in front of you by replacing one name with another."

What a childish response. You're only coming up with counter arguments based on tit for tat. Because you have nothing to discuss. You brought up Usman's wife and her situation, I questioned you on that and you saved yourself by counter argument.

The example of Allah and Iblees, I only showed you your ideology and thinking but through the mirror. But I don't think anything is going to change or move you.

"If Muawiya was a ruthless killer who was blinded by his love for dunya, why would an "infallible" Imam (ra) make him in charge of the Ummah?"

It's not the decision of the Imam or down to them. It's the decision of the Ummah of how they behave and want they want. Muawiyah, Yazeed and many more examples I can give you. Allah sent 124,000 Messengers for the guidance and governance of mankind. But what did mankind do and how they behaved, history is there my friend.

"Hence, all the misguidance in the Ummah can be blamed on Imam Hassan (ra).  SALAVAAT!!!"

And the sins of mankind and Satan having power to mislead them, who do think should be blamed for this?  Mankind? Satan? Or the one who allowed it willingly and knowingly? Just showing you your ideology and thinking but through the mirror again.

[iceman]

A letter from Ali to Muawiya.

Verily, those who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman have sworn allegiance to me on the same basis on which they swore allegiance to them. (On this basis) he who was present has no choice (to consider), and he who was absent has no right to reject; and consultation is confined to the muhajirun and the ansar. If they agree on an individual and take him to be Caliph it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.

If any one keeps away by way of objection or innovation they will return him to the position from where he kept away. If he refuses they will fight him for following a course other than that of the believers and Allah will put him back from where he had run away.

By my life, O Mu'awiyah, if you see with your intellect without any passion you will find me the most innocent of all in respect of `Uthman's blood and you will surely know that I was in seclusion from him, unless you conceal what is quite open to you (and accuse me of a crime I have not committed). Then you may commit any outrage (on me) as you wish and that is an end to the matter.

[Ijtaba]

Qiyas? What has qiyas got to do with it?

I said Qiyas of Muawiya being wrong on the basis that Muawiya thought that Army of Imam Ali (a.s) were rebels by their first attacking Muawiya's army while both parties were in negotiating phase.

You wanted a peek inside the head of Muawiya, now you want a peek inside the understanding of how Allah will judge according to Sunni's. I am sorry but I will not do such a thing. All I will say is, killing a believer is not a small thing. You must not forget however that Allah judges according to one's intentions.

Yes, indeed. ALLAH (SWT) judges according to one's intentions. Killing Muslims and believers is a serious matter and it was due to this reason most Sahabas avoided to participate in Civil Wars that took place during the rule of Imam Ali (a.s)

I don't think that is a valid conclusion, but even if, Muawiya was still the ruler of Syria, that is part of the whole problem.

Muawiya was governor of Syria at the time 'Uthman's rule but in the time of Imam Ali's (a.s) rule Muawiya was no longer governor of Syria as the Imam Ali (a.s) had removed him from the governorship. Muawiya and his supporters were rebels in the time of Imam Ali's (a.s) rule.

I don't think that the prohibitions regarding fighting back are so clear that there is no ijtihad possible regarding it.

They are clear as daylight. Prophet (s.a.w.w) had clearly forbidden Muslims to fight Muslim Ruler and commanded Muslims to strike their swords against rocks when Muslims started fighting each other.

Remember two rules given by Prophet (s.a.w.w):

- Draw out Swords when fighting enemies,

- Strike Swords against rocks when fighting each other.

Again, we are not talking about what Muawiya should have done. And if Muawiya thought Ali was held hostage, it would not be his justification for any of his decisions anyway, it was simply how he read the situation. His justification was Qisas for Uthman. And Muawiya or any one else are free to read a situation as they see it.

Muawiya may do whatever he likes but he will be held responsible for his actions. Iblees (l.a) did not bow down to Nabi Adam (a.s) due to Iblees's (l.a) qiyas of him (l.a) being superior as he (l.a) being made of Fire and Adam (a.s) being made of clay. But Iblees's (l.a) qiyas didn't save him from the Wrath of ALLAH (SWT).

For similar reasons as Muawiya not stepping down as ruler of Syria and pledging allegiance to Ali. They both saw the process as even though technically correct, but based on and directly benefiting from an injustice(in the case of Muawiya this was the murder of Uthman and in the case of Ali this was the deception of Abu Musa al Ashari) and therefore unacceptable.

Muawiya was just in demanding Qisas for the murder of 'Uthman but Muawiya was unjust in fighting Muslim Ruler. I hope following scenario would help you understand what I am trying to say.

Scenario: Robbers rob Person A's mobile phone. Person A goes to the Police station and reports the robbery.

Conclusion: Person A has followed the law and therefore he is on the right path.

Scenario: Policeman says that it will take 2 months for the process of the report to be completed and after that police will start the operation of hunting the robbers. Person A get disheartened and frustrated by Policeman's response that he snatches Policeman's mobile and says to him that he will only return his (policeman) mobile back when he would get Person A's mobile back from the robbers.

Conclusion: Person A has not followed the law and has been unjust by snatching policeman's mobile. Policeman has full authority to punish Person A for his disobedient behavior. If Person A fights back policeman then he is guilty of more serious crime. 

Al Hassan accepting the rulership obviously was the wisest thing to do. From the beginning he wanted to end this and he basically saw three options. Fighting Muawiya, unite by convincing Muawiya to pledge allegiance to him or unite by pledging allegiance to Muawiya. The first was not really an option for him because he wanted to end this peacefully and he saw no quick way to end this violently. In both remaining cases, it would not make sense to not accept the rulership. It would not make sense to convince Muawiya to give him the Caliphate if he didn't claim the Caliphate in the first place. Likewise, pledging allegiance to Muawiya without the Iraqi's pledging allegiance to al Hassan would have little to no effect as they would just find someone else to pledge allegiance to and rally behind. This is something that al Hassan obviously tried to prevent.

Why could we not expect this from Muawiya? Did Muawiya not want to end this peacefully? Did Muawiya not find it acceptable to pledge allegiance to Imam Hassan (a.s)?

Imam Hassan (a.s) ibn Ali (a.s) found the only way to end civil war was to hand over ruler-ship to Muawiya as Muawiya only wanted ruler-ship. Qisas of 'Uthman was only pretext of Muawiya because if Qisas of 'Uthman was the real motive of Muawiya then the first priority thing for Muawiya after assuming ruler-ship would be to take Qisas of 'Uthman.

[muslim720]

The reason why nothing adds up for you is because of your lack of age, experience  (in discussions) and also lack of knowledge and information.

I am certain I'm older than you and I have rendered more Christian missionaries and missionary Shias helpless than the number of your age in years.  The reason why I am harsh with you is because there is nothing you have posted which should be dignified with a mature response.  Ever!

You are not willing. You think and behave based on the enmity you have.

You go around and accuse us of being raised with hatred when you are the one with annual reminders of passion stories which do nothing but incite hate and inoculate your mind with garbage.

Logic and reason doesn't mean anything to you. And you aren't willing to get to know and understand.

On the contrary, before I even became a member of any Shia-Sunni forums, I was visiting Shi'i mosques to see how much of what is being broadcasted online is true (or untrue) about them.  While most of it can be rubbished as propaganda, I have unfortunately realized that a Shi'i (much like how the Qur'an speaks of certain Jews and Christians) can never be happy with anything we do.

We can believe Imam Ali (ra) was upon haqq, and as Sunnis we unanimously do believe that, but Shias won't quit until we deliver them the blood of Muawiya.

Imam Ali didn't fight Muawiya, he refused allegiance to Ali and wasn't willing to accept him as Caliph. He used the killing of Usman as an excuse to refuse allegiance. You need an excuse because no one comes clean or is that honest about themselves.

Fine!  I will pretend you are truthful but since you accused me of being weak with reason and logic, they (reason and logic) dictate that the last thing an "infallible" Guide (Imam Hassan) would do is to give such a man (Muawiya) the power over all Muslims.  Especially given the fact that the same man (Muawiya) refused the Caliphate of his father (Imam Ali) and dealt with his father (Imam Ali) in a dishonest manner.

What was the reason behind Safeen. Muawiyah accused Ali of having a hand in the killing. Ali claimed he was absolutely innocent of the matter.

You keep making it worse for yourself.  If Muawiya accused Imam Ali (ra) to have corroborated in the killing of Uthman (ra), why would Imam Hassan (ra) give him his "Divinely Ordained Right" of Leadership?  Would you honor someone who accuses your father (who is otherwise innocent) of murder with anything rightfully belonging to you?

Ali did what was right and necessary at the time. Hassan analysed the situation through history and learned that Muawiya will not give up or change his ways. He did what was right and necessary at the time based on circumstances.

I don't understand that someone can be this retarded, with all due respect to retards!  If Imam Hassan (ra) knew what was in Muawiya's heart then he should have known that Muawiya would not abide by any conditions mentioned in any treaty.  Then why did Imam Hassan (ra) hand over the entire Ummah to such a man? 

This is like saying the bank knew the borrower could not and would not pay back which is exactly why they gave him the loan.  What is wrong with your brain, ya miskeen?

Hussain refused allegiance to Yazeed because of him Tampering with Islam and the corruption he was bringing about within.

There is not a single shred of evidence that Yazeed was tampering with Islam.  He had many vices, committed the worst crimes and was a vile human being but he never tampered with Islam.  However, your beloved Malik bin Nuwayrah actually sought to abandon the pillar known as Zakat.  That is trying to change Islam yet he is "radhiAllahu anhu" to you and other Shias like yourself.

Returning to Yazeed, why don't you also blame Imam Hassan (ra)?  Knowing that Muawiya would not honor his promises and appoint his own son (Yazeed), Imam Hassan (ra) vacated the throne to make way for Muawiya.  If Imam Hassan (ra) would have kept his position, Muawiya - and by extension, his son Yazeed - would have never assumed power and Imam Hussain (ra) would have not been killed in Karbala.

Hussain didn't go to dethrone Yazeed but was told about the developing situation and was invited by the Kufans.history is there. Read and learn to get tout know.

I remember a Shi'i imam at a mosque denying that.  He said it was Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) who invented that "lie".  You all make up stories and strengthen/weaken reports as they suit you.

Did he have a choice?

This is what breaks the stupidity meter!  You have achieved this feat in the past too.  When Imam Ali (ra) remained silent after what happened in Saqifah, you say it was because he (Imam Ali) did not have power to fight the Caliph of the time.  And when Imam Hassan (ra) was the Caliph of the Muslims, you say he had no choice, therefore he was helpless, in the face of Muawiya.

SubhanAllah, the Companions (ra) of the Holy Prophet (saw) repeatedly rendered the "Infallible Imams" helpless irrespective of their political standing and power.  However, the "Infallible Imams" in control of the atoms and in possession of knowledge of past, present and future could not stand up to the Companions (ra) even when they commanded the entire Ummah, lol!

If yes, then what choice was that, continue to fight Muawiya  or end the bloodshed?

Then Imam Ali (ra) was wrong for fighting and continuing the bloodshed.  Given that Muawiya was using qisas as an excuse to serve an ulterior motive, Imam Ali (ra) should have made peace just like Imam Hassan (ra) did.

It's been 1400 years and still the Ummah is divided over those historical matters and can't gather on one page.

....and every Friday, every month, every year you sit in a congregation that only speaks of such historical matters.  In other words, your theology feeds off turmoil, division, bloodshed and chaos which is why we find it to be full of turmoil, division, blood and chaos.

We don't play the blame game or discuss based on division and enmity. We look at realty and facts. Logic and reason is what we go by.

If logic and reason were humans, you would have been in jail for raping them and you dare claim you go by them.  Joke!

[iceman]

I am certain I'm older than you and I have rendered more Christian missionaries and missionary Shias helpless than the number of your age in years.  The reason why I am harsh with you is because there is nothing you have posted which should be dignified with a mature response.  Ever!

You go around and accuse us of being raised with hatred when you are the one with annual reminders of passion stories which do nothing but incite hate and inoculate your mind with garbage.

On the contrary, before I even became a member of any Shia-Sunni forums, I was visiting Shi'i mosques to see how much of what is being broadcasted online is true (or untrue) about them.  While most of it can be rubbished as propaganda, I have unfortunately realized that a Shi'i (much like how the Qur'an speaks of certain Jews and Christians) can never be happy with anything we do.

We can believe Imam Ali (ra) was upon haqq, and as Sunnis we unanimously do believe that, but Shias won't quit until we deliver them the blood of Muawiya.

Fine!  I will pretend you are truthful but since you accused me of being weak with reason and logic, they (reason and logic) dictate that the last thing an "infallible" Guide (Imam Hassan) would do is to give such a man (Muawiya) the power over all Muslims.  Especially given the fact that the same man (Muawiya) refused the Caliphate of his father (Imam Ali) and dealt with his father (Imam Ali) in a dishonest manner.

You keep making it worse for yourself.  If Muawiya accused Imam Ali (ra) to have corroborated in the killing of Uthman (ra), why would Imam Hassan (ra) give him his "Divinely Ordained Right" of Leadership?  Would you honor someone who accuses your father (who is otherwise innocent) of murder with anything rightfully belonging to you?

I don't understand that someone can be this retarded, with all due respect to retards!  If Imam Hassan (ra) knew what was in Muawiya's heart then he should have known that Muawiya would not abide by any conditions mentioned in any treaty.  Then why did Imam Hassan (ra) hand over the entire Ummah to such a man? 

This is like saying the bank knew the borrower could not and would not pay back which is exactly why they gave him the loan.  What is wrong with your brain, ya miskeen?

There is not a single shred of evidence that Yazeed was tampering with Islam.  He had many vices, committed the worst crimes and was a vile human being but he never tampered with Islam.  However, your beloved Malik bin Nuwayrah actually sought to abandon the pillar known as Zakat.  That is trying to change Islam yet he is "radhiAllahu anhu" to you and other Shias like yourself.

Returning to Yazeed, why don't you also blame Imam Hassan (ra)?  Knowing that Muawiya would not honor his promises and appoint his own son (Yazeed), Imam Hassan (ra) vacated the throne to make way for Muawiya.  If Imam Hassan (ra) would have kept his position, Muawiya - and by extension, his son Yazeed - would have never assumed power and Imam Hussain (ra) would have not been killed in Karbala.

I remember a Shi'i imam at a mosque denying that.  He said it was Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) who invented that "lie".  You all make up stories and strengthen/weaken reports as they suit you.

This is what breaks the stupidity meter!  You have achieved this feat in the past too.  When Imam Ali (ra) remained silent after what happened in Saqifah, you say it was because he (Imam Ali) did not have power to fight the Caliph of the time.  And when Imam Hassan (ra) was the Caliph of the Muslims, you say he had no choice, therefore he was helpless, in the face of Muawiya.

SubhanAllah, the Companions (ra) of the Holy Prophet (saw) repeatedly rendered the "Infallible Imams" helpless irrespective of their political standing and power.  However, the "Infallible Imams" in control of the atoms and in possession of knowledge of past, present and future could not stand up to the Companions (ra) even when they commanded the entire Ummah, lol!

Then Imam Ali (ra) was wrong for fighting and continuing the bloodshed.  Given that Muawiya was using qisas as an excuse to serve an ulterior motive, Imam Ali (ra) should have made peace just like Imam Hassan (ra) did.

....and every Friday, every month, every year you sit in a congregation that only speaks of such historical matters.  In other words, your theology feeds off turmoil, division, bloodshed and chaos which is why we find it to be full of turmoil, division, blood and chaos.

If logic and reason were humans, you would have been in jail for raping them and you dare claim you go by them.  Joke!

The reason why you're harsh with me is because you're finding me difficult to handle. You get irritated and angry that's why you come up with counter arguments based on tit for tat just to hang in there.

Stick to the subject. Who are the rebels that were responsible for the killing of Usman? That's what we're discussing. Our happiness doesn't depend on your or what you say and do. You have your belief and that's fine with us. We have ours and that seems to bug you.

You believe Ali was on Haq? Finally. And I'll complete the half statement you've given. Ali was on Haq AND MUAWIYYA THEREFORE WAS ON BATIL. Was that too difficult? That is it. We don't need blood. Take a look at out history, WE GAVE BLOOD and still do. Our legacy is there to be seen and witnessed.

I'm mentioned to you Hassan's position and the circumstances surrounding it. I've also mentioned Ali and Hussein's position and situation. I don't like repeating myself. Refer to my posts.

Allah knows and knew everything so why did he create mankind all over again when he said to the angels that I am going to make a Caliph on earth and the angels responded by saying that they will be the cause of bloodshed by fighting each other.

When Allah knew this and many other things about what we're going to do then why doesn't he just punish people for knowing rather than waiting for them to do and then giving them time till their death to see if they repent and seek forgiveness.

First you not only defend but honour Muawiya and now you claim Sunnis believe Ali was on Haq and you honour Muawiya who happens to be on batil. Or have you created something different for the opposite of Haq? It's these double standards what we point out.

Apart from bank and building societies, there are others who lend or give loans. Did you know that some lend money and give loans regardless of your credit history  😊

[Ijtaba]

Going against Quran and Sunnah? His ijtihad also has basis in the Quran. Another case of  "hindsight is 20/20" here. Why don't you google what "hindsight is 20/20" mean.

By the way, nothing surprise at all. You have to say what you are supposed to say about him. Your imaan "feeds" on that.

As for us, we don't dwell on him and those events nor we say anything bad about him too (Al-Baqarah: 134 &141 and Al-Hashr: 10).

Can you provide evidence of your claim? How did Muawiya make ijtihad based on Qur'an that it is permissible to fight Muslim Ruler.

In Qur'an one can find commandment for Muslims to obey Ulul Amr (those in authority) but cannot find anything regarding fighting Ulul Amr. If you believe otherwise then do provide evidence rather than your opinion.

Rebelled? I don't think your imam was in agreement with you:
By the way, nothing surprise at all. You have to say what you are supposed to say about him. Your imaan "feeds" on that.

As for us, we don't dwell on him and those events nor we say anything bad about him too (Al-Baqarah: 134 &141 and Al-Hashr: 10).

I agree with my Imam (a.s). Both parties were Muslims but disagreement between them arose on the issue of Qisas of Uthman. The moment Muawiya & Syrians rebelled against the authority of Imam Ali (a.s) the former became rebels.

Killing muslims? How could he kill muslims if the other party was the one who brought those muslims into his terratory?

By the way, nothing surprise at all. You have to say what you are supposed to say about him. Your imaan "feeds" on that.

As for us, we don't dwell on him and those events nor we say anything bad about him too (Al-Baqarah: 134 &141 and Al-Hashr: 10).

Muawiya's territory? It was Imam Ali's (a.s) territory as all Muslim lands come under the control of Muslim ruler.

Nope. Nothing mystery nor unknown nor unclear. Even your imam admitted to that in the narration I posted above.

By the way, nothing surprise at all. You have to say what you are supposed to say about him. Your imaan "feeds" on that.

Again, as for us, we don't dwell on him and those events nor we say anything bad about him too (Al-Baqarah: 134 &141 and Al-Hashr: 10).

If Imam Ali (a.s) didn't consider Muawiya and his supporters to be rebels then on what basis did he (a.s) fight them?

Wow! That's sound very much unlike you. Such a desperate response. As pointed out by brother Muslim720, the hadith you quoted might be a plus to Muawiyya rather than minus.

But yeah, no surprise at all since you need to find whatever "perceived fault" to defend your belief in imamah. As I said before, your imaan "feeds" on those "perceived faults".

Again, as for us, we don't dwell on him and those events nor we say anything bad about him too (Al-Baqarah: 134 &141 and Al-Hashr: 10).

If it was a du'a for Muawiya and not a curse then why did Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj al-Naysaburi narrated this hadith under the chapter: Whomever Is Cursed, Reviled Or Prayed Against By The Prophet (SAW) When He Does Not Deserve That, It Will Be Purification, Reward And Mercy For Him.

Did he killed believers INTENTIONALLY? Hmm...

Sorry to say. Just to go by your deduction, If you applied that to Muawiyya, in fairness, the same should go to Ali too. The battle would have not happened should Ali did not bring his army to Syria (astaghfirullah).

By the way, nothing surprise at all. You have to say what you are supposed to say about him. Your imaan "feeds" on that.

Again, as for us, we don't dwell on him and those events nor we say anything bad about him too (Al-Baqarah: 134 &141 and Al-Hashr: 10).

Imam Ali (a.s) could not fight Muslims as he (a.s) knew fighting Muslims is forbidden but Imam Ali (a.s) could fight rebels as fighting rebels is allowed and encouraged in al-Qur'an.

IN CONCLUSION:

In another thread, you said you wanted to know Sunnis view of the event. However, in here, it is a kind of Tabarra' "fest". Yeah, you can go on with your Tabarra' "fest". Understandbly, you have to say what you are supposed to say about him. Your imaan "feeds" on those.

Again, as for us, we don't dwell on him and those events nor we say anything bad about him too (Al-Baqarah: 134 & 141 & Al-Hashr: 10). In fact, there isn't any need for us to defend whatever happened at that times in the first place. Our fundamental of belief doesn't depend on those events, unlike you.

If you consider talking about past events as Tabarra then its your understanding.

[Cherub786]

Can you provide evidence of your claim? How did Muawiya make ijtihad based on Qur'an that it is permissible to fight Muslim Ruler.

He obviously didn't consider Amir ul Mu'minin^RA to be the Muslim Ruler. If he did, he obviously wouldn't have fought against him. That was his ijtihad.

[Ijtaba]

He obviously didn't consider Amir ul Mu'minin^RA to be the Muslim Ruler. If he did, he obviously wouldn't have fought against him. That was his ijtihad.

Ibless (l.a) obviously didn't consider Adam (a.s) to be the ALLAH'S (SWT) Caliph. If he (l.a) did, he (l.a) obviously wouldn't have considered Adam (a.s) as being inferior to him (l.a). That was his (l.a) ijtihad.

[Cherub786]

Ibless (l.a) obviously didn't consider Adam (a.s) to be the ALLAH'S (SWT) Caliph. If he (l.a) did, he (l.a) obviously wouldn't have considered Adam (a.s) as being inferior to him (l.a). That was his (l.a) ijtihad.

You don't know what Ijtihad is. Ijtihad by definition means seeking to arrive at a judgment in a matter that is not definitive from the sacred texts of divine revelation. Iblis did not make ijtihad since he disobeyed a direct command of Allah. Since Allah did not directly reveal that sayyidina Ali b. Abi Talib RA is the Caliph or Ruler, it was a matter of ijtihad for Mu'awiya to reject his caliphate.