TwelverShia.net Forum

Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

whoaretheshia

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #60 on: November 28, 2017, 09:49:20 PM »
SubhanAllah. Before i had some doubt that maybe brother Hani was convinced and had fair arguments. Now , there is no doubt in my mind he is one of the individuals that has shown the most bias i have ever come across. I have debated many people, and their arguments and points are far more balanced, but he has emulated Ibn Taymiyyah. Nay, he has exceeded even the extremes Ibn Taymiyyah showed.

Claims made by Hani:

1. Ali ibn Abi Talib was a weak and incompetent Caliph

2. Jamal was the fault of Ali, for not finding the killers of Uthman quickly enough.

3. Siffin was the fault of Ali, for wanting to get rid of M'uawiyah and not finding the killers of Uthman enough.

4. At the battle of Khaybar , Abu Bakr and Umar severely weakened the enemy, and so all Ali had to do was the easy job of finishing them off.

5. Ali ibn Abi Talib showed gross incompetence for moving to Kufa (rather than bothering to read why actually it was a masterstroke and Ali chose it based on strategy).

6. Despite facing three major civil wars and the Khawarij, he had it easier than the other Caliphs, who were bold leaders, stronger, wiser, and competent, while he was weak and incompetent and only a jurist, but totally inept as a leader.

7. Ali should have paid off the hypocrites , rather than staying firm upon justice that he would not engage in bribery. He then compared Muhammed (saw) paying fresh, loyal Muslim converts who partook in a war and helped, with Ali needing to pay Munafiqs, hypocrites, liars, and mischief makers! SubhanAllah!



If this is not approaching Nasb, i really don't know what is. After that Hani, you have lost a lot of credibility in my eyes. I have never debated anyone who has shown bias on this scale. I have taken screenshots of some of what you have posted, and i actually urge you to write on TSN and say these things about Ali, so that the wider Sunni audience can recognise this website for the bias it truly has.

This is one of the two main posters on here, one of the foundational pillars of TSN, and there is now no doubt in my mind Hani has demonstrated the gross bias against Ali.  I am not making this up, go back and read his posts for yourself. If they are deleted, ask me and i will provide screenshots. How strange, by Allah, my heart breaks to see the unity of some of these people on their wrong.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2017, 10:00:33 PM by whoaretheshia »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #61 on: November 28, 2017, 09:57:48 PM »
why did you say Hani has bias? Ali RA was a pious man, but like any other men, no one is perfect. He was a great warrior and excelled at that, but understandably didnt do well in another field. Was he a great muslim leader? Yes, for sure. Did he ever make mistake and failed? Of course. We dont ascribe to shia bollywood movie script about a superhuman superhero who never made mistake. Even syaikhain we believed made mistake, that doesnt mean we dont respect them. You shias are full of drama. You believe imam misguided many people or Ali did nothing when his family was abused etc and act as if those are not insult and yet act to be shocked when hani said Ali was not in the same league with syaikhain when it comes to being a political leadership. Id say the belief that Ali and his progeny misguided people is more shocking than what hani said.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2017, 10:01:52 PM by Hadrami »

whoaretheshia

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #62 on: November 28, 2017, 10:01:36 PM »
why did you say Hani has bias? Ali RA was a pious man, but like any other men, no one is perfect. He was a great warrior and excelled at that, but understandably didnt do well in another field. Was he a great muslim leader? Yes, for sure. Did he ever make mistake and failed? Of course. We dont ascribe to shia bollywood movie script about a superhuman superhero who never made mistake. Even syaikhain we believed made mistake, that doesnt mean we dont respect them. You shias are full of drama.

This is extremely deceitful. There is a difference between saying someone is not 'perfect' and calling them a weak incompetent leader. Blaming all the major civil wars on them, and all the other slanders i have detailed on the post on top of this page.

As for a 'Super Human Hero', don't forget who killed the most at Badr, who remained firm at Uhud, who it was who took on Amr at Khandaq. Who it was who Allah by divine intervention ordained would be the one to take Khaybar , and in the process slaughtered Harith and Marhab. Put aside superheros, they are all fake. Ali ibn Abi Talib, raised by Muhammed (saw) and blessed by Allah as the man through whom Allah brought many victories to the Muslims is real.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2017, 10:03:29 PM by whoaretheshia »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #63 on: November 28, 2017, 10:04:02 PM »
This is extremely deceitful. There is a difference between saying someone is not 'perfect' and calling them a weak incompetent leader. Blaming all the major civil wars on them, and all the other slanders i have detailed on the post on top of this page.
oh really, a shia full of taqiyya calling me a deceitful? You can do better than that. Shia believing ali did nothinh when Allah's command were being rejected and believing imam misguided people over and over are more shocking than what hani wrote. Stop being a drama queen ya takfiri

whoaretheshia

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #64 on: November 28, 2017, 10:07:19 PM »
oh really, a shia full of taqiyya calling me a deceitful? You can do better than that. Shia believing ali did nothinh when Allah's command were being rejected and believing imam misguided people over and over are more shocking than what hani wrote. Stop being a drama queen ya takfiri

SubhanAllah, you have not even addressed my post brother. I have never shown disrespect to a single poster on here, but you have consistently jumped from one unrelated discussion to another.  Look, i am not here to foster discord and enmity and create in you further anger and emotion to reject Haq. Believe what you will.

"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #65 on: November 28, 2017, 10:07:39 PM »
saying that mahdi hide because hes afraid for his life is more shocking than anything in this thread. Yeah, the progeny of Khaybar warrior is afraid to meet his enemies. But yeah, you takfiri shia crying crocodile tears is what youre good at. Hani did nothing wrong except stating a fact that Syaikhain were better political leaders while acknowledging Ali was a better warrior.

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #66 on: November 28, 2017, 10:09:07 PM »
Look, i am not here to foster discord and enmity and create in you further anger and emotion to reject Haq. Believe what you will.


but how can you when your small irrelevant sect is all about creating discord and enmity and also master of using anger and emotion 😆

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #67 on: November 28, 2017, 10:14:59 PM »
SubhanAllah, you have not even addressed my post brother.
oh yes i have, ive already wrote i didnt have problem even if syaikhain failed, because i know they returned and fought many battles and won after that. You are trying to belittle them when your mahdi failed to even face enemy, instead he hide 😁

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #68 on: November 28, 2017, 10:19:39 PM »
we all know syaikhain failed to take Khaybar, but there is a RELEVANT question you should ask, if they were that weak & useless according to shia because of that, shia who still have functioning brain shoul ask "what of our hiding leader who left us because he was afraid to be killed by his enemy". Yes, it is so relevant. If i were you, i would be embarassed to even raise this topic about syaikhin, but hey shia has no shame.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2017, 10:20:45 PM by Hadrami »

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 255
  • +19/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #69 on: November 29, 2017, 11:54:32 AM »
Although the brothers have already responded and destroyed the terrible and biased arguments of the Shia member.

His assumptions and the conclusions that that he reach to are the most childish and ridiculous ones, void of any logic. He also lacks knowledge of the Seerah of the Prophet (saw) and the Khulafa as can be seen from the claims he make.

One one side we have historical facts, on the other side we have his claims.

When he was told that Allah granted Abubakr and Umar victories after victories he said that in history non-Muslims were also capable of conquests and big empires. By his own logic there is nothing special about Ali's fighting skills then since in the history there were also many great non-Muslim warriors.

We all agree that Ali was a great warrior, better warrior than Abubakr and Umar and so was Khalid bin Walid better warrior than trio of them. Who was better and successful statesmen and ruler? History is there for everyone to see. But someone here wants to rewrite history according to his wishes.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2017, 12:21:16 PM by MuslimK »
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

Optimus Prime

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #70 on: November 29, 2017, 12:22:06 PM »
Too right.

Here is some of the bakwaas he's plucked out of thin air. I'm paraphrasing not quoting him literally.

Quote
'Ali killed most of the people at Badr?


Proof?

Quote
'Ali stuck around while the others ran, and protected the Prophet (SAW).

Proof? Talha, and Sa'd ibn Abi Waqas comes to mind actually!

Quote
It was because of 'Ali most wars were won, and he quotes how he defeated 'Amr ibn Abdi Wud

This victory didn't win them the war. Allah (SWT) mentions in the Qu'ran how all the Sahaba were very sacred, and he aided them with the winds of destruction. By Shia logic aka shaitani logic, this fear extends to 'Ali as well since the Qu'ran doesn't say otherwise. Hence, Allah (SWT) takes full credit.  ;)

- Mu'tah was all about Khalid.

- Khaybar was all about ' Ali.

- Conquest of Makkah, there was no war, but only a few skirmiches at best.

- Hunayn, there is no report that 'Ali KO'd many troops, but he was the Prophet (SAW), when the rest fled, as was Abu Bakr & 'Umar.

- Tabuk, he was left behind.

Thus, it can be summed up 'Ali played a vital role with his presence, skills, and guile in all the major battles. Likewise many other Sahabas did as well. Anyone who says 'Ali single handedly, or was the main arbitrator to why each battle was won, or resulted in a stale mate, is distoring historical facts, and equating him to be some random Arab Terminator.

He's spewing these retarded assumptions because he's under the cosh now. No wonder Hani used the analogy, that they're percieving 'Ali as a Marvel Superhero, lmao.

« Last Edit: November 29, 2017, 12:33:37 PM by Optimus Prime »

whoaretheshia

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #71 on: November 29, 2017, 10:43:19 PM »
SubhanAllah. You know brothers, there was part of me that hoped some of the brothers here would admit comments made by Hani even for them were out of order. I had hoped some of you would have employed objective thinking in realising that calling Ali a weak and incompetent leader, claiming he was the one most at fault for the battles of Jamal , Siffin, and Narhawn, siding with Aisha and M'uawiyah over him, and whatever i have detailed at the top of this page which many Sunni scholars would consider blasphemous would be enough to make some individuals pause and speak out.

Yet, i have been called the one with the Bias? By Allah, the truth is right in front of your eyes. This is an individual writing prolifically on TSN and contributes to the majority of your articles, and has made these explicit statements about Ali ibn Abi Talib. I am convinced that this is not the place to be to even get a proper understanding of the Salafi-Athari creed, and yes, i know Hani is not of that creed. It seems he forms his own view points as he sees fit, but he should have a word with whoever published an article calling the Ashari and Maturidi deviants, and claiming the Salafi-Athari creed was upon Haq.

I genuinely do not have time to reply to seven or eight people at once, and have other matters to attend to. InshAllah if i get time, i will reply to some of you.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #72 on: November 30, 2017, 04:00:59 AM »
rather than reply to all, maybe you should answer using whatever left in your brain cells of why you try to belittle syaikhain because they failed to take khaybar when your useless current leader fail to do anything since he ran away/fled/hide because he was afraid to face his enemy. You shias are devoid of any shame. Youre current leader is not even worth to be called anything other than a complete failure. 1300yr has passed and he is still a useless failure. A complete useless leader compare to syaikhain and yet you never stopped bashing 2 most successfull leaders in the history of islamic nation. Your mahdi doesnt even worth the dirt on their feet. Yes, your mahdi being a coward who doesnt have the guts to face his enemy let alone lead any army is relevant to this topic.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2017, 04:02:41 AM by Hadrami »

whoaretheshia

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #73 on: November 30, 2017, 03:30:05 PM »
I am half tempted to actually just unregister from this forum. The ones writing your articles include individuals who are borderline Nasibi, the others post refutation but never engage. A number of the normal users abuse, hurl insults, and do not engage in a fair, well mannered and reason dialogue. There are only a coupe or so individuals on here that actually partake in these discussions with respect and tolerance. What is the point if we do not come into discussion without open minds without tolerance, without the ability to show respect and focus solely on points made, rather than hurling abuses?

Someone called Ali ibn Abi Talib a weak and incompetent leader , one of your most prolific writers on TSN, and no-one has batted an eye lid? Did Allah not tell you be just even if it is against your own selves?

Truly, i am going to limit my time here. Sorry to the two or three respectful brothers on here, and you know who you are who i actually like discussing these matters with, because they show respect. You do a credit to your school of thought and actually allow me to better understand your views. As for the others, i sincerely ask you to look inwards and reflect on whether you are acting in a civilised manner.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 255
  • +19/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #74 on: November 30, 2017, 03:45:17 PM »
Aren't all Sunnis Nawasib according to the definition set by your scholars and narrations falsely attributed to Jafar and Baqir?

Anyways, a pious and righteous ruler can also be a weak ruler. You are just getting emotional.
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

Optimus Prime

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #75 on: November 30, 2017, 04:45:29 PM »
I am half tempted to actually just unregister from this forum. The ones writing your articles include individuals who are borderline Nasibi, the others post refutation but never engage. A number of the normal users abuse, hurl insults, and do not engage in a fair, well mannered and reason dialogue. There are only a coupe or so individuals on here that actually partake in these discussions with respect and tolerance. What is the point if we do not come into discussion without open minds without tolerance, without the ability to show respect and focus solely on points made, rather than hurling abuses?

Someone called Ali ibn Abi Talib a weak and incompetent leader , one of your most prolific writers on TSN, and no-one has batted an eye lid? Did Allah not tell you be just even if it is against your own selves?

Truly, i am going to limit my time here. Sorry to the two or three respectful brothers on here, and you know who you are who i actually like discussing these matters with, because they show respect. You do a credit to your school of thought and actually allow me to better understand your views. As for the others, i sincerely ask you to look inwards and reflect on whether you are acting in a civilised manner.

Respected brother in humanity.

I agree with you. We should be somewhat ashamed, that we remain tight lipped at some of the comments that were being heaved against 'Ali. I hold up my hand, and admit my deep planted hate for Shias got the better of me. May Allah (SWT) forgive me. I flat out disagree with some of the comments made against 'Ali in this thread, and believe given his status he commands great respect. Unquestionably, I believe he was on Haq in both civil wars, more so against Mu'awiyah. Anyone who after studying the two political events and knowing the mainstream of position of our Akabir believes otherwise, are spiritually bankrupt, and devoid of any faculty of reason.

Let me make myself loud n' clear. I strongly disagree in the strongest of terms with some of the comments made against 'Ali thread, and although we're all entitled to our own opinions we must be mindful of how we articulate such points. Our Akabir have stressed this very point with painful regularity when discussing the Sahaba, and thus this extends to 'Ali too. 

Having said all that, Hani is not a Nasibi, or close to being one for that matter. That’s an ill-bred assessment to make considering his lineage, and the amount of work he has done on TSN is only a reflection of his love for Ahlul Bhayt. His reputation precedes him, and he has been contributing to the Deen of Allah (SWT) for the best part of a decade, Alhamdulillah. The amount, and quality work he has put in is of a mountainous nature. It is my heartfelt du’a, that Allah (SWT) rewards him, and Farid for their yielding fanaticism to upkeep the veracity of our Deen from scoundrels.

As you can see Sunni vs Shia dialogue is not without emotional drama. I’m sure you’re accustomed to this if you really have debated Sunnis before. Having said that, I think you should retire from this site and our midst permanently. The amount of crock you post, and the radical assumptions you weasel into your argument just to embellish your point of view, and candy pick narrations to add further weight of flavour to your arguments has exposed your true snidely intentions. I refuse to believe you ventured here to engage in Sunni vs Shia polemics in an academic manner, but came here to manipulate, and deceive. That is not me being an arrogant prick, but it's my observation after carefully studying your trail of najs posts. I’m not going to spoon feed you with examples before you ask.

I suggest you adopt one of the two options.

1)   Retire, and offer refutation against the articles, and threads on TSN on your own site. That way you can debunk, dispel, and refute all the distortions (in your mind) that TSN is guilty of without getting involved in e-spats with everyone. You're not going to persuade any of us, that your unique point of view of profound Islamic moments is in atheists of the Sunni norm, or the view that's been upheld by our 'Ulema for over 14 centuries. Na huh!

2)    Retire temporarily, and contact Farid privately, and organise an official debate that can take place between the two of you on your own terms without the involvement of anyone else.

May Allah (SWT) protect the Ummah from these wolves in sheepskin who ravage, pillage and plunder the Imaan and the Akhlaaq of the ignorant and unwary.  :)
« Last Edit: November 30, 2017, 04:50:47 PM by Optimus Prime »

Hani

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #76 on: November 30, 2017, 06:17:17 PM »
Haven't been in this thread for a while, what're you guys having `Ashura' processions now? When does the wailing and crying start?

What a shame that we're dealing with history in such a dark-age and primitive mentality, placing average humans with weaknesses and temptations and errors beyond criticism purely because of emotional reasons.

Then they claim to want an accurate reading and that they're pioneers in revisionist history and that the Ummah was blinded by following our forefathers without questioning the popular history.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Hadrami

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #77 on: November 30, 2017, 07:34:43 PM »
Someone called Ali ibn Abi Talib a weak and incompetent leader , one of your most prolific writers on TSN, and no-one has batted an eye lid? Did Allah not tell you be just even if it is against your own selves?
I "batted an eyelid" everytime i hear shia stories about Ali. Shia have so many stories which portrays Ali as an extremely weak & incompetent leader, weak & incompetent husband, weak & incompetent father, weak & incompetent religious guide, weak & incompetent in many things and here you are being a drama queen again. For example the "broken rib" myth, majority if not almost all maraji believe in it, even khamenei the clever politician ayatola wouldnt pretend he doesnt believe in it. Your marja taqlid is not Fadlala, hes dead. Yes, a story which shows Ali as an extremely weak & incompetent husband no matter how much stupid excuses shia can come up with. And that is just 1 example of many shia nasibi like stories. The only nasibi is you ya takfiri.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2017, 07:36:13 PM by Hadrami »

muslim720

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #78 on: December 01, 2017, 01:56:19 AM »
SubhanAllah. Before i had some doubt that maybe brother Hani was convinced and had fair arguments. Now , there is no doubt in my mind he is one of the individuals that has shown the most bias i have ever come across. I have debated many people, and their arguments and points are far more balanced, but he has emulated Ibn Taymiyyah. Nay, he has exceeded even the extremes Ibn Taymiyyah showed.

Rest assured, you do not know anything about Ibn Taymiyyah (rah).  You just foam at the mouth with his name because that is what you Shias do.  Your entire madhhab, and in fact existence, is contingent upon Muawiya, Yazeed, Banu Ummayah, Ibn Taymiyyah and Wahabis.  Without these scapegoats, you have no reason to flourish, preach or even exist.

Having said that, brother Hani was making an assessment as per your methodology.  For example, it is not far-fetched - in fact, one can support it with evidence (like you have tried in case of Abu Bakr and Umar, may Allah be pleased with them), albeit using bias - to prove that Imam Ali (ra) was not as sharp of a leader as the first two.

So please be a little more insightful when discussing and analyzing responses.
"Our coward ran from those in authority" - Iceman (admitting the truth regarding his 12th Imam)

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Umar ibn al-Khattab and Abu Bakr ibn abi Quhafa at Khaybar
« Reply #79 on: December 01, 2017, 11:08:21 PM »
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
« Last Edit: December 02, 2017, 12:18:14 AM by MuslimK »

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
844 Views
Last post November 07, 2015, 01:20:50 AM
by MuslimK
10 Replies
2302 Views
Last post December 28, 2015, 04:45:54 AM
by Rationalist
16 Replies
4466 Views
Last post July 10, 2016, 04:51:03 PM
by Optimus Prime
0 Replies
993 Views
Last post March 02, 2019, 01:45:02 PM
by MuslimK