TwelverShia.net Forum

What happened in Saqifa?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

iceman

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #120 on: November 11, 2017, 04:04:16 AM »
I'm cool as ice dude. I'm just highlighting the silliness of your Columbus-like approach.

Narrations are accepted as is, and remember when the companions would narrate a piece of history, they'd paraphrase, and would not reveal every minute detail.

You're asking the same question without taking on board, and addressing the counter points me, and brother zaid_ibn_ali made. I advise you to review the entire thread from the start. It can't be arsed to go around the clock with you on this. In short, ignore the way it was arranged, and direct your attention that most of the companions had accepted (including 'Ali) Abu Bakr as the new sheriff.

If you're going to clutch at straws, and look for random reasons to doubt the integrity of the Ansar whom Allah (SWT) has promised Jannah many times in the Qur'an, then answer the following questions for me first:

- Why did 'Ali randomly accept to be Caliphah knowing that many of the other companions were not around to be consulted like Anas ibn Malik, and many others?
- We know 25/26 years prior, 'Ali himself was not happy for not being consulted, so why was 'Ali himself being two faced on this occasion?

This is what you said,

"ignore the way it was arranged"

Listen to yourself and here it is again,

"ignore the way it was arranged"

This is exactly what it's all about. And this is what makes it illegitimate.

Let me repeat that we are not discussing individuals or personalities. It's not about whether every single person was present or available. What was Saqifa all about? Do you want me to repeat it over and over again. You are trying to divert the attention by bringing Ali in to this.

Optimus Prime

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #121 on: November 11, 2017, 04:27:19 AM »
I'm cool as ice dude. I'm just highlighting the silliness of your Columbus-like approach.

Narrations are accepted as is, and remember when the companions would narrate a piece of history, they'd paraphrase, and would not reveal every minute detail.

You're asking the same question without taking on board, and addressing the counter points me, and brother zaid_ibn_ali made. I advise you to review the entire thread from the start. It can't be arsed to go around the clock with you on this. In short, ignore the way it was arranged, and direct your attention that most of the companions had accepted (including 'Ali) Abu Bakr as the new sheriff.

If you're going to clutch at straws, and look for random reasons to doubt the integrity of the Ansar whom Allah (SWT) has promised Jannah many times in the Qur'an, then answer the following questions for me first:

- Why did 'Ali randomly accept to be Caliphah knowing that many of the other companions were not around to be consulted like Anas ibn Malik, and many others?
- We know 25/26 years prior, 'Ali himself was not happy for not being consulted, so why was 'Ali himself being two faced on this occasion?

This is what you said,

"ignore the way it was arranged"

Listen to yourself and here it is again,

"ignore the way it was arranged"

This is exactly what it's all about. And this is what makes it illegitimate.

Let me repeat that we are not discussing individuals or personalities. It's not about whether every single person was present or available. What was Saqifa all about? Do you want me to repeat it over and over again. You are trying to divert the attention by bringing Ali in to this.

All your points have been comprehensively tackled, and refuted in this very thread. Anyone with a functional brain cells will be able to deduce this fact quite comfortably.

'Ali, and billions of others over the past 1428 years have regarded Abu Bakr's appointment as the Amir as just, and legal within boundaries of the shariah. Thus, your isolated, and bias view is fit for the recycling bin.

I raised 'Ali's appointment as Amir because there are striking parallels between the two. If you applied your mind, you would have realised that, but since it's filled with hateful clout, I'm sure common sense is hard to come by.

Engaging with you is like flogging a dead horse. Everything in the association with the Shia mind is morally and spiritually corruptive. The corruption of their faculty of reason and the derangement of the Aql have blinded their zombie followers to the degree that they no longer bring the dimension of the Aakhirat into their lives.

I'm retiring from the thread. :D
« Last Edit: November 12, 2017, 01:35:09 PM by MuslimK »

zaid_ibn_ali

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #122 on: November 11, 2017, 11:57:06 AM »
Iceman has a tendency to ignore posts which he can't answer.

Brother abu Muhammad has already pointed out the complete fallacy in your entire assertion that saqifa was illegitimate due to the way it was carried out. As he mentioned, you are saying it would have only been legitimate if all the principles of shura had been followed.

You are very confused indeed.

None of it should matter to you as either way you are a twelver shia & your sect believes Ali was the infallible Imam.

Thus the whole discussion about the democratic nature of selecting a leader whilst the living Imam was alive is nothing but a sin according to your sect.

Your confusion is partly understandable. You have conceded before that the Quran mentions shura. Sunni's follow this concept. Yet you are torn between this realisation & your upbringing as a shia.

This whole thread demonstrates that you are torn between accepting the Quranic concept of shura which is what sunni's believe (but shia reject) & your Imami background.

InshAllah the more you research the topic the more you will understand.


Optimus Prime

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #123 on: November 11, 2017, 04:49:56 PM »
Iceman has a tendency to ignore posts which he can't answer.

Brother abu Muhammad has already pointed out the complete fallacy in your entire assertion that saqifa was illegitimate due to the way it was carried out. As he mentioned, you are saying it would have only been legitimate if all the principles of shura had been followed.

You are very confused indeed.

None of it should matter to you as either way you are a twelver shia & your sect believes Ali was the infallible Imam.

Thus the whole discussion about the democratic nature of selecting a leader whilst the living Imam was alive is nothing but a sin according to your sect.

Your confusion is partly understandable. You have conceded before that the Quran mentions shura. Sunni's follow this concept. Yet you are torn between this realisation & your upbringing as a shia.

This whole thread demonstrates that you are torn between accepting the Quranic concept of shura which is what sunni's believe (but shia reject) & your Imami background.

InshAllah the more you research the topic the more you will understand.



Exactly. He just jumps past the explanations we've provided, and spins his own counter questions without fully understanding/responding.

The majority accepted his leadership, and followed his political orders. If the your followers accept, and obey you, then how can anyone in their rightful mind suggest such leadership is consider void centuries later?

What's also interesting is during the discussion at Saqifah, there were 3 candidates being nominated, Abu Bakr, Umar, and Sa'd ibn 'Ubadah. This tells us, they were having a genuine disagreement, and therefore was no underlying conspiracy which, is the retarded Shia narrative.

iceman

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #124 on: November 13, 2017, 11:41:23 PM »
Enough has been said and discussed about Saqifa. Now let the people make up their own mind. Reality and facts are there. You can stick to your understanding and I'll stick to mine. I believe in the freedom to believe in what you want and the rigjt disagree. And you should calm down and give it a rest as well.

Optimus Prime

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #125 on: November 15, 2017, 02:06:22 PM »
Enough has been said and discussed about Saqifa. Now let the people make up their own mind. Reality and facts are there. You can stick to your understanding and I'll stick to mine. I believe in the freedom to believe in what you want and the rigjt disagree. And you should calm down and give it a rest as well.

Okay!!!

Abu Muhammad

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #126 on: November 16, 2017, 06:28:53 PM »
Enough has been said and discussed about Saqifa. Now let the people make up their own mind. Reality and facts are there. You can stick to your understanding and I'll stick to mine. I believe in the freedom to believe in what you want and the rigjt disagree. And you should calm down and give it a rest as well.

@iceman, you still haven't clarified this:

@iceman, I was asking you this:

Now, it's upon you to prove otherwise showing where in Quran and Sunnah that the Saqifa is illegitimate, which you have been evading all along.

But you bring me quranic verses and hadith to support the argument that Allah has already appointed someone to lead the ummah after the demise of Prophet (saw). Even though the point you were trying to prove was that Quran and Sunnah are not silent with regard to leadership after Prophet (saw), without realizing it, you are telling us that Saqifa, in itself, was illegitimate no matter how it was conducted. Because the leader had already been appointed by Allah.         

Dude, you are actually rebutting yourself. Do you aware of that? All your rants in this thread were basically about Saqifa was illegitimate because of no proper shura was done and it's unfair. You then said that if it were properly conducted, Saqifa would have been legitimate:

At least it was conducted fairly, justly, properly and reasonably. It's legitimate because of the procedure and method. No one could argue or challenge this.

You are such a confused soul.
Make up your mind, dude:
1. Illegitimate because of the selection process was unfair, etc.; or
2. Illegitimate because of a leader has already been appointed?


Which one bro?

iceman

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #127 on: November 17, 2017, 05:06:43 AM »
Enough has been said and discussed about Saqifa. Now let the people make up their own mind. Reality and facts are there. You can stick to your understanding and I'll stick to mine. I believe in the freedom to believe in what you want and the rigjt disagree. And you should calm down and give it a rest as well.

@iceman, you still haven't clarified this:

@iceman, I was asking you this:

Now, it's upon you to prove otherwise showing where in Quran and Sunnah that the Saqifa is illegitimate, which you have been evading all along.

But you bring me quranic verses and hadith to support the argument that Allah has already appointed someone to lead the ummah after the demise of Prophet (saw). Even though the point you were trying to prove was that Quran and Sunnah are not silent with regard to leadership after Prophet (saw), without realizing it, you are telling us that Saqifa, in itself, was illegitimate no matter how it was conducted. Because the leader had already been appointed by Allah.         

Dude, you are actually rebutting yourself. Do you aware of that? All your rants in this thread were basically about Saqifa was illegitimate because of no proper shura was done and it's unfair. You then said that if it were properly conducted, Saqifa would have been legitimate:

At least it was conducted fairly, justly, properly and reasonably. It's legitimate because of the procedure and method. No one could argue or challenge this.

You are such a confused soul.
Make up your mind, dude:
1. Illegitimate because of the selection process was unfair, etc.; or
2. Illegitimate because of a leader has already been appointed?


Which one bro?

We are discussing the Ahle Sunah point of view here so it can't be the second one. As far as the first one is concerned that doesn't apply either. WHY? Because there was no selection process in Saqifa to begin with. It wasn't a public assembly/gathering or a planned/organised event.

One more time, who gathered in Saqifa and why? Some heads of the Ansar to select THEIR OWN LEADER. How many Muhajir turned up and why? ONLY THREE to stop the Ansar from going ahead and being the cause of dividing the Ummah in to sectarian/tribal division. Where was the rest of the important personalities and why? They didn't have a CLUE about what was going on and they were busy with the funeral processions.

Nobody gave any authority what so ever to those handful of individuals present in Saqifa to proceed ahead with choosing a leader for the entire Ummah. So talking about the first one whether the selection process was fair and just or not is out of the question because there was no process to begin with and the gathering of those HANDFUL OF INDIVIDUALS wasn't for that purpose.

Those gathered wanted to select THEIR OWN LEADER for God knows why and those three that turned up wanted to prevent something terrible from happening. But eventually something terrible did happen. They took the matter in to their own hands and then imposed the hasty decision through means of violence and threatening behaviour and if people didn't accept and comply then division was threatened. People started to accept for various reasons and unfortunate circumstances.

Abu Muhammad

Re: What happened in Saqifa?
« Reply #128 on: November 21, 2017, 03:23:26 AM »
You are such a confused soul.
Make up your mind, dude:
1. Illegitimate because of the selection process was unfair, etc.; or
2. Illegitimate because of a leader has already been appointed?


We are discussing the Ahle Sunah point of view here so it can't be the second one. As far as the first one is concerned that doesn't apply either. WHY? Because there was no selection process in Saqifa to begin with. It wasn't a public assembly/gathering or a planned/organised event.

Nope, it can't be from the view of Ahlus Sunnah because the argument you presented does not follow the methodology of Ahlus Sunnah when deriving certain ruling.

I asked you to show from the very fundamental sources of Ahlus Sunnah i.e. Quran & Sunnah how did Saqifa become illigitimate, you failed to do that. The best you can give was non-Sunni view.

So, the best I can say that your view is from Ahlul Hawa i.e. those who follow their own whims. All were coming from your own wishful thinking.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
317 Views
Last post May 02, 2017, 11:46:47 PM
by Farid
121 Replies
1799 Views
Last post October 08, 2017, 05:13:24 PM
by wannabe