TwelverShia.net Forum

Saqifa - ATT: Iceman

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

iceman

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #100 on: October 02, 2017, 08:14:09 PM »
lol I was talking with link about his fake saname quraish dua without chains until you butted in with your childish remarks, you had to give a remark didnt you, was that part of discuss and debate?? Very intellectual.

I have answered you they all chose shura to choose next leader please do keep up and I also told you that it's common knowledge within the ummah, its not even an issue hence I didn't see the need to provide refs but if you insist then just read this https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/islamistruth.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/how-did-umar-ibn-al-khattab-%D8%B1%D8%B6%DB%8C-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%B9%D9%86%D9%87-became-caliph/amp/

Like I said it's common knowledge nothing special it's just a part of our common understanding in Islam. Just like it's common knowledge yazid is not our imam or leader and he wasn't chosen by shura either, this is why I say read and learn a sunni perspective and not listen to some pulpit monkey..... I've advised you that before.

You want my explanation on ayah tatheer? No problem

There is no inclination or sign or proof of divine leadership in that ayah either,  (that was the theme and that's why I answered the 10 stupid questions) and that is in accordance with the majority Muslims whom you consider hellbound.

Even you cannot prove from ayah tatheer the divine appointment/Imamate concept, idea or notion.


So again you have nothing CLEAR of divine imam appointment or rule from Quran and not even ayah tatheer either itself explains such, it's AMBIGIOUS in the Quran unknown...........and yet you do have shura/consultation as a concept in Quranand sunnah and its implementation was done by Muslims.

There is nothing to discuss if you haven't a base or ground from Allah swt CLEAR or authentic sunnah on divine appointments.

The end

Ps if you do have CLEAR evidences in words from Allah Almighty swt then do post and it will be a start until then I can't be asked to entertain your ideas and assumptions on certain words from Quran which you twist (as above) and relate to an alien added concept of divine imams leadership, I Finish with this ayah perfect to sum up our debate...................
..“It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) the Book (this Qur’aan). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkaam (commandments), Al-Faraa’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudood (laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allaah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:7]

Until you find the ahkaam verses on divine leadership after Nabi Muhammad saw's prophethood we can proceed...........

Steady on there cowboy. One step at a time. 'Rijs was removed from them' what is 'Rijs'? Lets start off from here.

Hadrami

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #101 on: October 03, 2017, 12:17:37 AM »
Why would the Ansaar want a leader of their own? Why didn't everybody gather together and choose a leader for the Ummah? The Ansaar knew about the stance of the Muhajir that they would not accept Ali nor would they let him succeed.The Prophet (s) was dying and the signs and disobedience towards him was present and clear. There is a lot to support this. If one doesn't want to accept then that is fine. Like I said before the decision in Saqifa wasn't conducted properly and fairly.
re-read my previous reply. I dont need to repeat myself.

The previous leader didn't tell the Ummah about A, B or C? Are you serious? You are clearly accusing the previous leader of irresponsibility and carelessness. Khamenei was selected a week before Khomeini was buried.
You dimwit, they suddenly gathered in a state of shock & mourning as you said. Well, your demigod, Khomeini died then his followers suddenly gathered and selected Khamenei. Where's your objection you shiite? Your double standard is cringeworthy.

What, did a separate faction or tribe gather to choose their own and the others suddenly rushed to stop them that, "what the hell do you think you are doing?."
You were questioning why sahaba have a sudden need to gathering to elect leader when Prophet sallalahu alayhi wasallam havent even been buried. Unfortunately, shiite like you just realised same thing happen with how Khamenei rose to his throne. Now youre changing your tune. Next time, do some research so you dont look so stupid

LOL! What does DIMWIT mean and is it part of your vocabulary or bringing up?
DIMWIT is a complete stupidity of someone who condemned sahaba gathering to elect leader (Abu Bakr) in mourning period when his own demigod's (Khomeini) follower also elected your other demigod (khamenei) in mourning period. Yep, dimwit=10000% stupid 😂
« Last Edit: October 03, 2017, 12:19:58 AM by Hadrami »

Abu Muhammad

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #102 on: October 03, 2017, 12:25:43 AM »
@iceman

Could you provide the historical account of what were actually happened, according to you, starting from the death of the prophet (saw) until the election of Abu Bakr.

iceman

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #103 on: October 03, 2017, 05:42:54 PM »
@iceman

Could you provide the historical account of what were actually happened, according to you, starting from the death of the prophet (saw) until the election of Abu Bakr.

It would be more suitable and better if you put forward what you believe in and why then I will discuss that with you in detail. Because what ever I say and put forward since I'm a Shia it's not going to be accepted. Suspicion and doubt about me is already there at the very beginning. So lets hear it. Fire away.

Mythbuster1

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #104 on: October 03, 2017, 06:51:23 PM »
lol I was talking with link about his fake saname quraish dua without chains until you butted in with your childish remarks, you had to give a remark didnt you, was that part of discuss and debate?? Very intellectual.

I have answered you they all chose shura to choose next leader please do keep up and I also told you that it's common knowledge within the ummah, its not even an issue hence I didn't see the need to provide refs but if you insist then just read this https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/islamistruth.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/how-did-umar-ibn-al-khattab-%D8%B1%D8%B6%DB%8C-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%B9%D9%86%D9%87-became-caliph/amp/

Like I said it's common knowledge nothing special it's just a part of our common understanding in Islam. Just like it's common knowledge yazid is not our imam or leader and he wasn't chosen by shura either, this is why I say read and learn a sunni perspective and not listen to some pulpit monkey..... I've advised you that before.

You want my explanation on ayah tatheer? No problem

There is no inclination or sign or proof of divine leadership in that ayah either,  (that was the theme and that's why I answered the 10 stupid questions) and that is in accordance with the majority Muslims whom you consider hellbound.

Even you cannot prove from ayah tatheer the divine appointment/Imamate concept, idea or notion.


So again you have nothing CLEAR of divine imam appointment or rule from Quran and not even ayah tatheer either itself explains such, it's AMBIGIOUS in the Quran unknown...........and yet you do have shura/consultation as a concept in Quranand sunnah and its implementation was done by Muslims.

There is nothing to discuss if you haven't a base or ground from Allah swt CLEAR or authentic sunnah on divine appointments.

The end

Ps if you do have CLEAR evidences in words from Allah Almighty swt then do post and it will be a start until then I can't be asked to entertain your ideas and assumptions on certain words from Quran which you twist (as above) and relate to an alien added concept of divine imams leadership, I Finish with this ayah perfect to sum up our debate...................
..“It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) the Book (this Qur’aan). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkaam (commandments), Al-Faraa’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudood (laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allaah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:7]

Until you find the ahkaam verses on divine leadership after Nabi Muhammad saw's prophethood we can proceed...........

Steady on there cowboy. One step at a time. 'Rijs was removed from them' what is 'Rijs'? Lets start off from here.


Rijz = impurity

On condition matey, "Allah swt WISHES", wish is to want something......ALLAH SWT wants to remove rijz from the house of ahlubaith ra, so it's conditional and that condition is explained at the start of the verse (which by the way includes the wives), so according to your logic........the wives were divine too😊

Wives ra;
1) rijz was removed
2) They are also ahlubaith according to the verse thatheer

How deep does the rabbit hole go my friend?

Remember you have nothing until you bring clear ahkam verses free m Quran and yet all these posts you have nothing.

You have the Quran it contains more than 6000 verses and yet nothing on divine appointment????? Why can't you use Quran on its own to prove your shia position on divine appointment? Why do you refer to written books centuries later to back your position??

That alone says something about shia, you cannot produce your main claim of Imamate/divine leadership from Quran at all as can be seen by your posts, whilst shura/consultation is mentioned.

iceman

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #105 on: October 03, 2017, 10:09:47 PM »
lol I was talking with link about his fake saname quraish dua without chains until you butted in with your childish remarks, you had to give a remark didnt you, was that part of discuss and debate?? Very intellectual.

I have answered you they all chose shura to choose next leader please do keep up and I also told you that it's common knowledge within the ummah, its not even an issue hence I didn't see the need to provide refs but if you insist then just read this https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/islamistruth.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/how-did-umar-ibn-al-khattab-%D8%B1%D8%B6%DB%8C-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%B9%D9%86%D9%87-became-caliph/amp/

Like I said it's common knowledge nothing special it's just a part of our common understanding in Islam. Just like it's common knowledge yazid is not our imam or leader and he wasn't chosen by shura either, this is why I say read and learn a sunni perspective and not listen to some pulpit monkey..... I've advised you that before.

You want my explanation on ayah tatheer? No problem

There is no inclination or sign or proof of divine leadership in that ayah either,  (that was the theme and that's why I answered the 10 stupid questions) and that is in accordance with the majority Muslims whom you consider hellbound.

Even you cannot prove from ayah tatheer the divine appointment/Imamate concept, idea or notion.


So again you have nothing CLEAR of divine imam appointment or rule from Quran and not even ayah tatheer either itself explains such, it's AMBIGIOUS in the Quran unknown...........and yet you do have shura/consultation as a concept in Quranand sunnah and its implementation was done by Muslims.

There is nothing to discuss if you haven't a base or ground from Allah swt CLEAR or authentic sunnah on divine appointments.

The end

Ps if you do have CLEAR evidences in words from Allah Almighty swt then do post and it will be a start until then I can't be asked to entertain your ideas and assumptions on certain words from Quran which you twist (as above) and relate to an alien added concept of divine imams leadership, I Finish with this ayah perfect to sum up our debate...................
..“It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) the Book (this Qur’aan). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkaam (commandments), Al-Faraa’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudood (laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allaah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:7]

Until you find the ahkaam verses on divine leadership after Nabi Muhammad saw's prophethood we can proceed...........

Steady on there cowboy. One step at a time. 'Rijs was removed from them' what is 'Rijs'? Lets start off from here.


Rijz = impurity

On condition matey, "Allah swt WISHES", wish is to want something......ALLAH SWT wants to remove rijz from the house of ahlubaith ra, so it's conditional and that condition is explained at the start of the verse (which by the way includes the wives), so according to your logic........the wives were divine too😊

Wives ra;
1) rijz was removed
2) They are also ahlubaith according to the verse thatheer

How deep does the rabbit hole go my friend?

Remember you have nothing until you bring clear ahkam verses free m Quran and yet all these posts you have nothing.

You have the Quran it contains more than 6000 verses and yet nothing on divine appointment????? Why can't you use Quran on its own to prove your shia position on divine appointment? Why do you refer to written books centuries later to back your position??

That alone says something about shia, you cannot produce your main claim of Imamate/divine leadership from Quran at all as can be seen by your posts, whilst shura/consultation is mentioned.

Allah wants/intends, what ever suits you, to remove rijs. So why does Allah want/intend to remove rijs and then purify these certain individuals, to what or which state? To the state of purification? Why? Just out of the blue? Just for the sake of it or just for fun? Common on, surely there has to be a reason a purpose for this.

Now these people have had rijs removed from them. Rijs is all kind of impurity, any kind. And not only this then they have been purified. And not just purified but to the state of purification. We consider these individuals as 'masoom' because of this verse and Allah's act.

We consider these as our guvnors, the purified and the best. Your Khilafath brings in anyone, from this, that to the likes of Yazeed.

Then you accept and reject individuals based on their actions and doings rather than accepting that the system you have chosen (Khilafath) has a problem.

Farid

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #106 on: October 04, 2017, 01:15:28 AM »
@ mythbuster
@ iceman


Both of you guys seem to be unaware of the meaning of rijs according to the infallible Imam. Quranic verses should not be interpreted according to your understanding of language. If the infallible says something, then his interpretation is final. ;)

http://www.twelvershia.net/2017/01/17/meaning-rijs-3333/


Mythbuster1

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #107 on: October 04, 2017, 09:41:28 AM »
@ mythbuster
@ iceman


Both of you guys seem to be unaware of the meaning of rijs according to the infallible Imam. Quranic verses should not be interpreted according to your understanding of language. If the infallible says something, then his interpretation is final. ;)

http://www.twelvershia.net/2017/01/17/meaning-rijs-3333/



Jazakhallah brother Farid, this is my whole point........iceman is playing with words of Quran to enforce his view on divine appointment.

lol I was talking with link about his fake saname quraish dua without chains until you butted in with your childish remarks, you had to give a remark didnt you, was that part of discuss and debate?? Very intellectual.

I have answered you they all chose shura to choose next leader please do keep up and I also told you that it's common knowledge within the ummah, its not even an issue hence I didn't see the need to provide refs but if you insist then just read this https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/islamistruth.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/how-did-umar-ibn-al-khattab-%D8%B1%D8%B6%DB%8C-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%B9%D9%86%D9%87-became-caliph/amp/

Like I said it's common knowledge nothing special it's just a part of our common understanding in Islam. Just like it's common knowledge yazid is not our imam or leader and he wasn't chosen by shura either, this is why I say read and learn a sunni perspective and not listen to some pulpit monkey..... I've advised you that before.

You want my explanation on ayah tatheer? No problem

There is no inclination or sign or proof of divine leadership in that ayah either,  (that was the theme and that's why I answered the 10 stupid questions) and that is in accordance with the majority Muslims whom you consider hellbound.

Even you cannot prove from ayah tatheer the divine appointment/Imamate concept, idea or notion.


So again you have nothing CLEAR of divine imam appointment or rule from Quran and not even ayah tatheer either itself explains such, it's AMBIGIOUS in the Quran unknown...........and yet you do have shura/consultation as a concept in Quranand sunnah and its implementation was done by Muslims.

There is nothing to discuss if you haven't a base or ground from Allah swt CLEAR or authentic sunnah on divine appointments.

The end

Ps if you do have CLEAR evidences in words from Allah Almighty swt then do post and it will be a start until then I can't be asked to entertain your ideas and assumptions on certain words from Quran which you twist (as above) and relate to an alien added concept of divine imams leadership, I Finish with this ayah perfect to sum up our debate...................
..“It is He Who has sent down to you (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) the Book (this Qur’aan). In it are Verses that are entirely clear, they are the foundations of the Book [and those are the Verses of Al-Ahkaam (commandments), Al-Faraa’id (obligatory duties) and Al-Hudood (laws for the punishment of thieves, adulterers)]; and others not entirely clear. So as for those in whose hearts there is a deviation (from the truth) they follow that which is not entirely clear thereof, seeking Al-Fitnah (polytheism and trials), and seeking for its hidden meanings, but none knows its hidden meanings save Allaah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord.” And none receive admonition except men of understanding”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:7]

Until you find the ahkaam verses on divine leadership after Nabi Muhammad saw's prophethood we can proceed...........

Steady on there cowboy. One step at a time. 'Rijs was removed from them' what is 'Rijs'? Lets start off from here.


Rijz = impurity

On condition matey, "Allah swt WISHES", wish is to want something......ALLAH SWT wants to remove rijz from the house of ahlubaith ra, so it's conditional and that condition is explained at the start of the verse (which by the way includes the wives), so according to your logic........the wives were divine too😊

Wives ra;
1) rijz was removed
2) They are also ahlubaith according to the verse thatheer

How deep does the rabbit hole go my friend?

Remember you have nothing until you bring clear ahkam verses free m Quran and yet all these posts you have nothing.

You have the Quran it contains more than 6000 verses and yet nothing on divine appointment????? Why can't you use Quran on its own to prove your shia position on divine appointment? Why do you refer to written books centuries later to back your position??

That alone says something about shia, you cannot produce your main claim of Imamate/divine leadership from Quran at all as can be seen by your posts, whilst shura/consultation is mentioned.

Allah wants/intends, what ever suits you, to remove rijs. So why does Allah want/intend to remove rijs and then purify these certain individuals, to what or which state? To the state of purification? Why? Just out of the blue? Just for the sake of it or just for fun? Common on, surely there has to be a reason a purpose for this.

Now these people have had rijs removed from them. Rijs is all kind of impurity, any kind. And not only this then they have been purified. And not just purified but to the state of purification. We consider these individuals as 'masoom' because of this verse and Allah's act.

We consider these as our guvnors, the purified and the best. Your Khilafath brings in anyone, from this, that to the likes of Yazeed.

Then you accept and reject individuals based on their actions and doings rather than accepting that the system you have chosen (Khilafath) has a problem.


It was for the wife's also, your divine appointment isnt there in the ayah.

In fact YOU have a problem, nowhere EVEN in ayah thatheer even with your explanation of the word rijz, there is no sign from Allah swt that it means divine leadership, UNTIL you add your own commentary on to it.

Come on bro look at all these posts and not 1 have you proved Imamate through Quran and sunnah all the verses you provided the 10 LAME questions you thought was gonna break our backs.....ONLY TO BE TURNED AGAINST YOU.

Again from my first post to this post SHURA is in Quran the Sahaba ra followed Quran as well as sunna,subhanallah.

Divine appointment/leader????........ still waiting bro, all your doing is giving commentaries and words that have broader meanings but you cannot provide a clear ayah.........that's the problem with you your coming from an alien concept and forcing the meaning on to the Quran by stretching selected words to correspond with your divine alien thought.

wannabe

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #108 on: October 05, 2017, 06:29:10 AM »
my understanding of hadith below: hazrat umar made it perfectly clear, saqifa was an "evil" should the event be repeated again.

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 817:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
I used to teach (the Qur'an to) some people of the Muhajirln (emigrants), among whom there was 'Abdur Rahman bin 'Auf. While I was in his house at Mina, and he was with 'Umar bin Al-Khattab during 'Umar's last Hajj, Abdur-Rahman came to me and said, "Would that you had seen the man who came today to the Chief of the Believers ('Umar), saying, 'O Chief of the Believers! What do you think about so-and-so who says, 'If 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established afterwards.' 'Umar became angry and then said, 'Allah willing, I will stand before the people tonight and warn them against those people who want to deprive the others of their rights (the question of rulership)."
'Abdur-Rahman said, "I said, 'O Chief of the believers! Do not do that, for the season of Hajj gathers the riff-raff and the rubble, and it will be they who will gather around you when you stand to address the people. And I am afraid that you will get up and say something, and some people will spread your statement and may not say what you have actually said and may not understand its meaning, and may interpret it incorrectly, so you should wait till you reach Medina, as it is the place of emigration and the place of Prophet's Traditions, and there you can come in touch with the learned and noble people, and tell them your ideas with confidence; and the learned people will understand your statement and put it in its proper place.' On that, 'Umar said, 'By Allah! Allah willing, I will do this in the first speech I will deliver before the people in Medina."
Ibn Abbas added: We reached Medina by the end of the month of Dhul-Hijja, and when it was Friday, we went quickly (to the mosque) as soon as the sun had declined, and I saw Sa'id bin Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail sitting at the corner of the pulpit, and I too sat close to him so that my knee was touching his knee, and after a short while 'Umar bin Al-Khattab came out, and when I saw him coming towards us, I said to Said bin Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail "Today 'Umar will say such a thing as he has never said since he was chosen as Caliph." Said denied my statement with astonishment and said, "What thing do you expect 'Umar to say the like of which he has never said before?"
In the meantime, 'Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers for the prayer had finished their call, 'Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said, "Now then, I am going to tell you something which (Allah) has written for me to say. I do not know; perhaps it portends my death, so whoever understands and remembers it, must narrate it to the others wherever his mount takes him, but if somebody is afraid that he does not understand it, then it is unlawful for him to tell lies about me. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Holy Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajam (the stoning of married person (male & female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. Allah's Apostle did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him.
I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, 'By Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah's Book,' and thus they will go astray by leaving an obligation which Allah has revealed. And the punishment of the Rajam is to be inflicted to any married person (male & female), who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if the required evidence is available or there is conception or confession. And then we used to recite among the Verses in Allah's Book: 'O people! Do not claim to be the offspring of other than your fathers, as it is disbelief (unthankfulness) on your part that you claim to be the offspring of other than your real father.' Then Allah's Apostle said, 'Do not praise me excessively as Jesus, son of Marry was praised, but call me Allah's Slave and His Apostles.' (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, 'By Allah, if 'Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.' One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr. Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed.
And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa'da. 'Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. I said to Abu Bakr, 'Let's go to these Ansari brothers of ours.' So we set out seeking them, and when we approached them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final decision of the Ansar, and said, 'O group of Muhajirin (emigrants) ! Where are you going?' We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go to them.' And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of Bani Sa'da. Behold! There was a man sitting amongst them and wrapped in something. I asked, 'Who is that man?' They said, 'He is Sa'd bin 'Ubada.' I asked, 'What is wrong with him?' They said, 'He is sick.' After we sat for a while, the Ansar's speaker said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and praising Allah as He deserved, he added, 'To proceed, we are Allah's Ansar (helpers) and the majority of the Muslim army, while you, the emigrants, are a small group and some people among you came with the intention of preventing us from practicing this matter (of caliphate) and depriving us of it.'
When the speaker had finished, I intended to speak as I had prepared a speech which I liked and which I wanted to deliver in the presence of Abu Bakr, and I used to avoid provoking him. So, when I wanted to speak, Abu Bakr said, 'Wait a while.' I disliked to make him angry. So Abu Bakr himself gave a speech, and he was wiser and more patient than I. By Allah, he never missed a sentence that I liked in my own prepared speech, but he said the like of it or better than it spontaneously. After a pause he said, 'O Ansar! You deserve all (the qualities that you have attributed to yourselves, but this question (of Caliphate) is only for the Quraish as they are the best of the Arabs as regards descent and home, and I am pleased to suggest that you choose either of these two men, so take the oath of allegiance to either of them as you wish. And then Abu Bakr held my hand and Abu Ubada bin Abdullah's hand who was sitting amongst us. I hated nothing of what he had said except that proposal, for by Allah, I would rather have my neck chopped off as expiator for a sin than become the ruler of a nation, one of whose members is Abu Bakr, unless at the time of my death my own-self suggests something I don't feel at present.'
And then one of the Ansar said, 'I am the pillar on which the camel with a skin disease (eczema) rubs itself to satisfy the itching (i.e., I am a noble), and I am as a high class palm tree! O Quraish. There should be one ruler from us and one from you.'
Then there was a hue and cry among the gathering and their voices rose so that I was afraid there might be great disagreement, so I said, 'O Abu Bakr! Hold your hand out.' He held his hand out and I pledged allegiance to him, and then all the emigrants gave the Pledge of allegiance and so did the Ansar afterwards. And so we became victorious over Sa'd bin Ubada (whom Al-Ansar wanted to make a ruler). One of the Ansar said, 'You have killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' I replied, 'Allah has killed Sa'd bin Ubada.' Umar added, "By Allah, apart from the great tragedy that had happened to us (i.e. the death of the Prophet), there was no greater problem than the allegiance pledged to Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble. So if any person gives the Pledge of allegiance to somebody (to become a Caliph) without consulting the other Muslims, then the one he has selected should not be granted allegiance, lest both of them should be killed."
i've read "saqifa: the debacle of islamic goevernmnet" and also it's rebuttal (saqifah.rebuttal") by ahlelbayt.com.
can't we just move on, and let Allah tells us in that we differed, on the judgement day?

Hadrami

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #109 on: October 05, 2017, 12:29:53 PM »
Shia's version of history doesnt make sense. They cant even answer a simple question why ansar whom they said were against Abu Bakr & co ended up choosing Abu bakr & gave him legitimacy. The more excuses they make, the more ridiculous it sounds

wannabe

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #110 on: October 06, 2017, 01:41:38 AM »
one shouldn't forget that victor writes history. just saying.

Mythbuster1

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #111 on: October 06, 2017, 02:47:59 PM »
one shouldn't forget that stories  of divine human beings and atom movers are not Islamic history.
Just saying.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2017, 02:49:22 PM by Mythbuster1 »

Hadrami

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #112 on: October 07, 2017, 02:05:15 PM »
one shouldn't forget that victor writes history. just saying.


But Allah gave us brain to be able to compare which is more likely a fictional bollywood type of history event

wannabe

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #113 on: October 07, 2017, 04:08:58 PM »
Shia's version of history doesnt make sense. They cant even answer a simple question why ansar whom they said were against Abu Bakr & co ended up choosing Abu bakr & gave him legitimacy. The more excuses they make, the more ridiculous it sounds
these are all from bro hani's kitab us saqifah:

page 37/123
they said: “By God, if the Khazraj were to rule over you even once then they shall always exceed you in virtue, they would never share it with you so rise and pledge to Aba Bakr.

page 43/123
When Abu Bakr received public allegiance, Salman al-Farisi said to the people: “You’ve chosen a man of wisdom (in leadership) but you missed your mark concerning our Prophet’s (saw) household. If you had awarded it to them then no two would have disputed over it and you’d have prospered.
page 46/123
Ali responded: “O aba `Ubaydah, you are the trustee of this nation so be wary of God. O fellow Muhajirin, do not remove Muhammad’s (saw) rule over the Arabs from the center of his
house then place it in your own houses, do not push his family away from the station he held among the people or from his rightful position. O fellow Muhajirin, we have the greatest claim to him (saw) because we are his household and thus we have more right to it than you as long as we have in our midst a reciter of God’s Book, well-learned about God’s religion and the traditions of the Messenger (saw), caring about the subjects, defending them from evil and dividing between them in equity. By Allah, among us is such a person so do not follow desires and become misguided then stray further from the path of truth.” Bashir bin Sa`d al-Ansari told `Ali: “If the Ansar had heard this from you O `Ali before pledging to Abu Bakr then no two would have differed on you.” 58

page 60/123
After things were settled, a group of Ansar and Muhajirin gathered and reproached one another. `Abdul-Rahman bin `Awf said: “O fellow Ansar, even though you acquired the virtue and honor of supporting (religion) but you do not have among you the likes of Abu Bakr, `Umar, `Ali or abi
`Ubaydah.” Zayd bin Arqam responded: “We do not deny the virtue of those whom you mentioned O `Abdul-Rahman, although we have on our side the master of the Ansar Sa`d bin `Ubadah. We have the man that God ordered our Prophet (saw) to greet and ordered that Qur’an be taken from him, he is Ubay bin Ka`b. We also have the leader of all scholars on the day of judgement, he is Mu`adh bin Jabal. And a man whom the Prophet (saw) counted his testimony as that of two, Khuzaymah bin Thabit. As for those you named from Quraysh, we know a man among them that no one would dispute with if he were to ask for it, `Ali bin abi Talib.” 76

page 61/123
Generally, the Muhajirun and most Ansar had no doubt that `Ali would be awarded authority after the Messenger (saw).

page 64/123,
It’s not until matters settled down for Abu Bakr that many of the Ansar regretted giving him the oath and reproached each-other;

the intention is not to prolong the matter. nor to win any argument. i just hate to see enmity among muslims.  :(
fi amaanillah.

Abu Muhammad

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #114 on: October 07, 2017, 06:41:12 PM »
Shia's version of history doesnt make sense. They cant even answer a simple question why ansar whom they said were against Abu Bakr & co ended up choosing Abu bakr & gave him legitimacy. The more excuses they make, the more ridiculous it sounds
these are all from bro hani's kitab us saqifah:

page 37/123
they said: “By God, if the Khazraj were to rule over you even once then they shall always exceed you in virtue, they would never share it with you so rise and pledge to Aba Bakr.

page 43/123
When Abu Bakr received public allegiance, Salman al-Farisi said to the people: “You’ve chosen a man of wisdom (in leadership) but you missed your mark concerning our Prophet’s (saw) household. If you had awarded it to them then no two would have disputed over it and you’d have prospered.
page 46/123
Ali responded: “O aba `Ubaydah, you are the trustee of this nation so be wary of God. O fellow Muhajirin, do not remove Muhammad’s (saw) rule over the Arabs from the center of his
house then place it in your own houses, do not push his family away from the station he held among the people or from his rightful position. O fellow Muhajirin, we have the greatest claim to him (saw) because we are his household and thus we have more right to it than you as long as we have in our midst a reciter of God’s Book, well-learned about God’s religion and the traditions of the Messenger (saw), caring about the subjects, defending them from evil and dividing between them in equity. By Allah, among us is such a person so do not follow desires and become misguided then stray further from the path of truth.” Bashir bin Sa`d al-Ansari told `Ali: “If the Ansar had heard this from you O `Ali before pledging to Abu Bakr then no two would have differed on you.” 58

page 60/123
After things were settled, a group of Ansar and Muhajirin gathered and reproached one another. `Abdul-Rahman bin `Awf said: “O fellow Ansar, even though you acquired the virtue and honor of supporting (religion) but you do not have among you the likes of Abu Bakr, `Umar, `Ali or abi
`Ubaydah.” Zayd bin Arqam responded: “We do not deny the virtue of those whom you mentioned O `Abdul-Rahman, although we have on our side the master of the Ansar Sa`d bin `Ubadah. We have the man that God ordered our Prophet (saw) to greet and ordered that Qur’an be taken from him, he is Ubay bin Ka`b. We also have the leader of all scholars on the day of judgement, he is Mu`adh bin Jabal. And a man whom the Prophet (saw) counted his testimony as that of two, Khuzaymah bin Thabit. As for those you named from Quraysh, we know a man among them that no one would dispute with if he were to ask for it, `Ali bin abi Talib.” 76

page 61/123
Generally, the Muhajirun and most Ansar had no doubt that `Ali would be awarded authority after the Messenger (saw).

page 64/123,
It’s not until matters settled down for Abu Bakr that many of the Ansar regretted giving him the oath and reproached each-other;

the intention is not to prolong the matter. nor to win any argument. i just hate to see enmity among muslims.  :(
fi amaanillah.

..... and yet none of them mentioned about Ghadeer Khum.

Hadrami

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #115 on: October 08, 2017, 06:46:06 AM »
the intention is not to prolong the matter. nor to win any argument. i just hate to see enmity among muslims.  :(
fi amaanillah.
you gotta be joking rite? For sunni, Saqifah finished 1000+ yr ago, the only group which prolong it is not us, but only that extreme backstabbing liar of a sect with contradictory version of history.

Hadrami

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #116 on: October 08, 2017, 06:47:51 AM »
Shia's version of history doesnt make sense. They cant even answer a simple question why ansar whom they said were against Abu Bakr & co ended up choosing Abu bakr & gave him legitimacy. The more excuses they make, the more ridiculous it sounds
these are all from bro hani's kitab us saqifah:

page 37/123
they said: “By God, if the Khazraj were to rule over you even once then they shall always exceed you in virtue, they would never share it with you so rise and pledge to Aba Bakr.

page 43/123
When Abu Bakr received public allegiance, Salman al-Farisi said to the people: “You’ve chosen a man of wisdom (in leadership) but you missed your mark concerning our Prophet’s (saw) household. If you had awarded it to them then no two would have disputed over it and you’d have prospered.
page 46/123
Ali responded: “O aba `Ubaydah, you are the trustee of this nation so be wary of God. O fellow Muhajirin, do not remove Muhammad’s (saw) rule over the Arabs from the center of his
house then place it in your own houses, do not push his family away from the station he held among the people or from his rightful position. O fellow Muhajirin, we have the greatest claim to him (saw) because we are his household and thus we have more right to it than you as long as we have in our midst a reciter of God’s Book, well-learned about God’s religion and the traditions of the Messenger (saw), caring about the subjects, defending them from evil and dividing between them in equity. By Allah, among us is such a person so do not follow desires and become misguided then stray further from the path of truth.” Bashir bin Sa`d al-Ansari told `Ali: “If the Ansar had heard this from you O `Ali before pledging to Abu Bakr then no two would have differed on you.” 58

page 60/123
After things were settled, a group of Ansar and Muhajirin gathered and reproached one another. `Abdul-Rahman bin `Awf said: “O fellow Ansar, even though you acquired the virtue and honor of supporting (religion) but you do not have among you the likes of Abu Bakr, `Umar, `Ali or abi
`Ubaydah.” Zayd bin Arqam responded: “We do not deny the virtue of those whom you mentioned O `Abdul-Rahman, although we have on our side the master of the Ansar Sa`d bin `Ubadah. We have the man that God ordered our Prophet (saw) to greet and ordered that Qur’an be taken from him, he is Ubay bin Ka`b. We also have the leader of all scholars on the day of judgement, he is Mu`adh bin Jabal. And a man whom the Prophet (saw) counted his testimony as that of two, Khuzaymah bin Thabit. As for those you named from Quraysh, we know a man among them that no one would dispute with if he were to ask for it, `Ali bin abi Talib.” 76

page 61/123
Generally, the Muhajirun and most Ansar had no doubt that `Ali would be awarded authority after the Messenger (saw).

page 64/123,
It’s not until matters settled down for Abu Bakr that many of the Ansar regretted giving him the oath and reproached each-other;

the intention is not to prolong the matter. nor to win any argument. i just hate to see enmity among muslims.  :(
fi amaanillah.

..... and yet none of them mentioned about Ghadeer Khum.
not just that, and yet they still "skipped" Ali and pledged allegiance to Umar then Uthman instead. So much for their regrets
and preference over Ali 😁
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 06:49:14 AM by Hadrami »

Link

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #117 on: October 08, 2017, 07:09:31 AM »
Reasoning leads to certainty.

Conjecture leads to doubt.

Working with a sure basis (Quran) and seeking help of Sunnah (ahadiths) and testing truth (true words of explainers of the Quran) and falsehood (fabrications of deceivers) to Quran is the only means forward.

There is anything in the religion to know or verify that is not in the Quran. If you can't prove your way from certainty with Quran, you should stop defending it.

Because so people in doubts and immersed in them speak by conjecture,   people don't get a chance to hear people who have certainty and are relying on certainty.

If you don't know be silent. If you can't see something Quran, don't say it's not in it. If something is unclear to you, don't say its not clear in God's book.

A plague mockery of God's signs and sinister laughter plague from Satanic forces might be for all you know, what keeps you from realizing proofs and reasoning in Quran.

Just take a step back,  because Quran has warned: "God doesn't guide who misguides."
Love of the family of Yaseen is the light of the heavens and the earth.

Hadrami

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #118 on: October 08, 2017, 07:12:04 AM »
Just take a step back,  because Quran has warned: "God doesn't guide who misguides."

which quran youre referring too? The one kept by scared hidden mahdi or the one we have now which reached us through those "misguided" sahaba? 😁

Link

Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
« Reply #119 on: October 08, 2017, 07:21:53 AM »
Just take a step back,  because Quran has warned: "God doesn't guide who misguides."

which quran youre referring too? The one kept by scared hidden mahdi or the one we have now which reached us through those "misguided" sahaba? 😁

The fact you believe it despite disbelieving everything it actually teaches answers your question.
Love of the family of Yaseen is the light of the heavens and the earth.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
967 Views
Last post May 02, 2017, 11:46:47 PM
by Farid
169 Replies
9631 Views
Last post December 30, 2019, 07:09:09 PM
by muslim720
21 Replies
1692 Views
Last post December 24, 2019, 09:50:11 PM
by iceman
34 Replies
1986 Views
Last post July 22, 2018, 01:37:40 AM
by iceman