TwelverShia.net Forum

Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Sahabah-AhlulBayt => Topic started by: Hadrami on September 28, 2017, 08:41:36 PM

Title: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on September 28, 2017, 08:41:36 PM
Instead on Kian's thread, you can discuss this topic here.

Quote
After the demise of the Prophet (s), Ansar gathered in Saqifa before everybody else goes there, announcing Sa'd b. 'Ubada who was a well-reputed companion of the Prophet (s) and the head of Khazraj as their candidate for caliphate. However, it was opposed by some Muhajirun who took caliphate to be their right. Each group mentioned their virtues and intimacy with the Prophet (s), considering itself to deserve the occupation of caliphate more than the other one.

When Ansar failed to seize the power, they suggested that they share it with the Muhajirun. But this strategy failed too, and when Muhajirun overtook the power, Sa'd b. 'Ubada who was a candidate for caliphate did not give up and threatened to launch a battle against Muhajirun.
 
Will talk about this further.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on September 28, 2017, 08:50:45 PM
if Saad was well reputed and head of Khazraj, but people still chosed Abu Bakr, doesnt it mean that he was more well reputed even among the Ansar? Couldn't the Ansar said no and refused Abu Bakr? What's the shia's excuse?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 28, 2017, 09:06:55 PM
if Saad was well reputed and head of Khazraj, but people still chosed Abu Bakr, doesnt it mean that he was more well reputed even among the Ansar? Couldn't the Ansar said no and refused Abu Bakr? What's the shia's excuse?

What do you think would have happened if the Ansaar refused Abu Bakr just has the Muhjeroon refused Saad? It would have turned violent. But why didn't the Muhjeroon accept and honour the Ansaar?

I was given a Hadith about showing love and obedience towards the Ansaar, so what happened to the Hadith? Why not let the funeral procession take place and then gather all the important and high ranking individuals in this very important decision. Why rush?

People didn't choose Abu Bakr willingly, the Ansaar argued the case then accepted so that it doesn't turn violent. The Muhajir present there were well known for their confrontational stance and violent and threatening behaviour.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 28, 2017, 09:15:20 PM
if Saad was well reputed and head of Khazraj, but people still chosed Abu Bakr, doesnt it mean that he was more well reputed even among the Ansar? Couldn't the Ansar said no and refused Abu Bakr? What's the shia's excuse?

He (Abu Bakr) said: ‘All the good that you have said about yourselves (the Ansar) is deserved. But the Arabs will recognize authority only in this clan of Quraysh, they being the best of the Arabs in blood and country. I offer you one of these two men: accept which you please.' Thus saying he took hold of my hand and that of Abu Ubayda b. al-Jarrah's...”

Muhammad, the Messenger of God, had not been dead an hour yet when Abu Bakr revived the arrogance of the Times of Ignorance by claiming before the Ansar that the Quraysh, the tribe to which he himself belonged, was “better” than or “superior” to them (the Ansar) “in blood and country!”

How did Abu Bakr know about this “superiority” of the Quraysh? Qur’an and its Bringer, Muhammad, never said that the tribe of Quraysh was superior to anyone or that it had any superiority at all.

In fact, it were the Quraysh who were the most die-hard of all the idolaters of Arabia. They clutched their idols, and they fought against Muhammad and Islam, with cannibalistic fury, for more than twenty years. The Ansar, on the other hand, accepted Islam spontaneously and voluntarily. They entered Islam en bloc and without demur.

The “superiority” of the Quraysh which Abu Bakr flaunted in Saqifa, before the Ansar, was a pre-Islamic theme which he revived to reinforce his claim to khilafat.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 28, 2017, 09:36:22 PM
if Saad was well reputed and head of Khazraj, but people still chosed Abu Bakr, doesnt it mean that he was more well reputed even among the Ansar? Couldn't the Ansar said no and refused Abu Bakr? What's the shia's excuse?

This is what Hani said;

"See? Even the way you write gives hints of personality worship. For regular Muslims, Wala' & Bara' are associated with God Almighty, even the Prophet (saw). However, your version skips the most important elements of religion, all the way to certain family members of a chosen Messenger (saw). I sense your sect misses the point of this entire religion, ignores the universality of the messages and reduces itself to a political party backing an Arab tribe, much similar to times of Jahiliyyah."

Take a look at Abu Bakr's speech at Saqifa and see who is backing an Arab tribe. All that Hani accuses me is going on in Abu Bakr's speech
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 28, 2017, 09:59:53 PM

How did Abu Bakr know about this “superiority” of the Quraysh? Qur’an and its Bringer, Muhammad, never said that the tribe of Quraysh was superior to anyone or that it had any superiority at all.

In fact, it were the Quraysh who were the most die-hard of all the idolaters of Arabia. They clutched their idols, and they fought against Muhammad and Islam, with cannibalistic fury, for more than twenty years. The Ansar, on the other hand, accepted Islam spontaneously and voluntarily. They entered Islam en bloc and without demur.

The “superiority” of the Quraysh which Abu Bakr flaunted in Saqifa, before the Ansar, was a pre-Islamic theme which he revived to reinforce his claim to khilafat.

Asalam alaikum

 I just had to answer this simplicity and other brothers will fill you in on the rest......... This is from the bringer of Quran Mohammed saw.....
.....https://sunnah.com/urn/634660.....https://sunnah.com/muslim/43/1.

You do know it's the argument of the Christian  west to downplay the importance or closeness of quraish to Nabi Mohammed saw by classing it as racism and saying He saw only cared about His saw's own tribe!......You are doing likewise on Abu Bakr siddique ra whether you realise or not.

Wasalam
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 28, 2017, 10:02:41 PM
https://sunnah.com/muslim/43/1

https://sunnah.com/urn/634660
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on September 28, 2017, 10:21:30 PM
if Saad was well reputed and head of Khazraj, but people still chosed Abu Bakr, doesnt it mean that he was more well reputed even among the Ansar? Couldn't the Ansar said no and refused Abu Bakr? What's the shia's excuse?

What do you think would have happened if the Ansaar refused Abu Bakr just has the Muhjeroon refused Saad? It would have turned violent.
Ok, so shia excuse was it could turned violent. So the sunnah of shia imam is to let people go against Allah's command? What a joke 😁

But why didn't the Muhjeroon accept and honour the Ansaar?
Wrong question. Why did Ansar which was the largest camp in Madina chosed Abu Bakr? Didnt they know Ali was already a caliph/imam?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on September 28, 2017, 10:27:48 PM
let me make it clear that when Ansar chosed Abu Bakr as their imam which according to shia is an act of kufr, the analogy is like them accepting Abu Bakr & others to refuse zakat or fasting etc because they are afraid it could turned violent. See how ridiculous your excuse is? Why cant you take the logical narrative which was Ansar respect and love Abu Bakr instead of making up laughable excuses?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 28, 2017, 10:59:19 PM
let me make it clear that when Ansar chosed Abu Bakr as their imam which according to shia is an act of kufr, the analogy is like them accepting Abu Bakr & others to refuse zakat or fasting etc because they are afraid it could turned violent. See how ridiculous your excuse is? Why cant you take the logical narrative which was Ansar respect and love Abu Bakr instead of making up laughable excuses?

According to the Hadith that Hani mentioned one should love, respect and follow the Ansaar. Now the Ansaar gathered in Saqifa, why? To select their leader. Did Abu Bakr and Omar allow them? No they didn't. So why didn't they obey and follow the Hadith?

Another question that why did the Ansaar gather in Saqifa on their own to select their leader? Because they knew and were witnessing the events what the Mohajeroon were up to. What ever happened in Saqifa and what ever the outcome, was this according to the Qoran and Sunah? The answer is clearly NO.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 28, 2017, 11:19:54 PM
We do not accept the outcome of Saqifa. Anything that goes against the Qoran and Sunah we absolutely and completely reject. This is the foundation of our faith. We and our faith and belief stand by with Allah (s) and his Messenger (s). You can accept and follow what ever incident you like and its outcome.

We belive in and follow the two weighty things. It is strange how Hani preaches about Thaqalain and its meaning and where he absolutely and completely accepts one weighty thing without any fuss or objection but raises suspicion and casts doubt about the other.

The Prophet (s) mentioned two weighty things and not just one so why not have the same view about the Qoran just as the progeny? Why not do exactly with the Qoran what you think and did with the Progeny?

Do what the Christians have done with the Bible. Just consider the Qoran as just a weighty thing and a very old book and move along with times and generation. You have different thought about the Progeny and you hold on to the other weighty thing the Prophet (s) left behind without any ifs and buts?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 28, 2017, 11:26:33 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 28, 2017, 11:41:22 PM
The best guarantee of the security of the State that Mohammad (s) had founded, was in informing the Muslims who would be their leader after his own death. The security of the State would, in fact, be fatally compromised if he failed to inform his followers who would succeed him as its Chief Executive.

No Muslim would dare to imagine that Mohammad, the Messenger of God, would say or do anything detrimental to the interests of Islam. Nor would any Muslim dare to imagine that Mohammad (s) would say or do anything illogical.

The assumption that Mohammad (s) did not appoint his own successor, and did not introduce him to the Muslim umma, is supported neither by facts nor by logic. Facts and logic are on his side – perennially and inevitably. It was in the outhouse of Saqifa that the logic of history went awry.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 02:55:02 AM
The whole Quran would be giving examples on how to elect our religious, social, and political leaders rather than the theme it has to submit to God's leaders who guide by his Authority if Saqifa was per God's will.  It would be the primary guidance that would enlighten humans on what steps they must take to ensure they pick the right leader.

The fact that Quran did talk about leadership in detail but didn't emphasize once on how people should go about electing their own leader, is enough for the believer to realize there is something wrong, it is not that of guidance to elect your own leaders.

It could not be silent on the issue of leadership as that most important subject pertaining on how to go about submitting to God. 

A book said to be from God but is silent about leadership and government and kingship and power and authority cannot be from God.

This is an essential need for humanity, but the fact is people don't like the answer of the Quran. So they play around with all the verses talking about the subject, disconnect from one another, and make all the relevant examples as just stories of the ancients.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on September 29, 2017, 06:36:54 AM
According to the Hadith that Hani mentioned one should love, respect and follow the Ansaar. Now the Ansaar gathered in Saqifa, why? To select their leader. Did Abu Bakr and Omar allow them? No they didn't. So why didn't they obey and follow the Hadith?
So now you want to twist the hadith and said it is about "follow the Ansar"? Hani clearly said the hadith about Ali & Ansar do not mean that we should follow everything they did. You did not read Hani's reply did you? 😊

Another question that why did the Ansaar gather in Saqifa on their own to select their leader?
Because they have never heard Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam told them they should elect Ali or Abu Bakr or anyone. Sunni's answer is so logical & simple, no crazy conspiracy theory at all 😁

Because they knew and were witnessing the events what the Mohajeroon were up to. What ever happened in Saqifa and what ever the outcome, was this according to the Qoran and Sunah? The answer is clearly NO.
Oh really, the Ansar knew what Abu Bakr/Umar were up to and you believed they opposed that and yet still selected Abu Bakr. Whats the point of that gathering then? The more excuses, the more laughable it is
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 11:54:30 AM
According to the Hadith that Hani mentioned one should love, respect and follow the Ansaar. Now the Ansaar gathered in Saqifa, why? To select their leader. Did Abu Bakr and Omar allow them? No they didn't. So why didn't they obey and follow the Hadith?
So now you want to twist the hadith and said it is about "follow the Ansar"? Hani clearly said the hadith about Ali & Ansar do not mean that we should follow everything they did. You did not read Hani's reply did you? 😊

Another question that why did the Ansaar gather in Saqifa on their own to select their leader?
Because they have never heard Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam told them they should elect Ali or Abu Bakr or anyone. Sunni's answer is so logical & simple, no crazy conspiracy theory at all 😁

Because they knew and were witnessing the events what the Mohajeroon were up to. What ever happened in Saqifa and what ever the outcome, was this according to the Qoran and Sunah? The answer is clearly NO.
Oh really, the Ansar knew what Abu Bakr/Umar were up to and you believed they opposed that and yet still selected Abu Bakr. Whats the point of that gathering then? The more excuses, the more laughable it is

Why did only the Ansaar gather in Saqifa to appoint a leader a successor to Muhammad (s) when this should be the responsibility of the entire Ummah as a whole and should involve everybody, all parties concerned and involved should have took part.

What was the sudden urge and need to gather in Saqifa on your own when the funeral processions are going on and the Muslim Ummah is in state of shock and mourning?

The Shaykhain were only informed of this secret gathering. And when they got to know they quietly slipped away with one named individual, why? Why weren't the others informed?

The Ansaar gathered to select their own leader because of the stance of certain reputable Muhajir who had influence and position. They (Ansaar) knew that the these Muhajir will not accept Ali and will not allow him to succeed.

They saw the pattern of disobedience by not joining Osama's army, not allowing the Prophet (s) to write a will when he asked for pen and paper and caused a fuss over it. The secrecy and planning  was whispered around and got to the Ansaar.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on September 29, 2017, 12:19:08 PM
According to the Hadith that Hani mentioned one should love, respect and follow the Ansaar. Now the Ansaar gathered in Saqifa, why? To select their leader. Did Abu Bakr and Omar allow them? No they didn't. So why didn't they obey and follow the Hadith?
So now you want to twist the hadith and said it is about "follow the Ansar"? Hani clearly said the hadith about Ali & Ansar do not mean that we should follow everything they did. You did not read Hani's reply did you? 😊

Another question that why did the Ansaar gather in Saqifa on their own to select their leader?
Because they have never heard Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam told them they should elect Ali or Abu Bakr or anyone. Sunni's answer is so logical & simple, no crazy conspiracy theory at all 😁

Because they knew and were witnessing the events what the Mohajeroon were up to. What ever happened in Saqifa and what ever the outcome, was this according to the Qoran and Sunah? The answer is clearly NO.
Oh really, the Ansar knew what Abu Bakr/Umar were up to and you believed they opposed that and yet still selected Abu Bakr. Whats the point of that gathering then? The more excuses, the more laughable it is

Why did only the Ansaar gather in Saqifa to appoint a leader a successor to Muhammad (s) when this should be the responsibility of the entire Ummah as a whole and should involve everybody, all parties concerned and involved should have took part.

What was the sudden urge and need to gather in Saqifa on your own when the funeral processions are going on and the Muslim Ummah is in state of shock and mourning?

The Shaykhain were only informed of this secret gathering. And when they got to know they quietly slipped away with one named individual, why? Why weren't the others informed?

The Ansaar gathered to select their own leader because of the stance of certain reputable Muhajir who had influence and position. They (Ansaar) knew that the these Muhajir will not accept Ali and will not allow him to succeed.

They saw the pattern of disobedience by not joining Osama's army, not allowing the Prophet (s) to write a will when he asked for pen and paper and caused a fuss over it. The secrecy and planning  was whispered around and got to the Ansaar.

Your replies are getting more lame each time.

I hate to break it to you, but here's something you need to understand:

The world did not & does not revolve around Ali.

The ansar wanted to install one of their own & if they felt Ali was chosen by the prophet then they would have chosen Ali too.
In the end they accepted Abu Bakr.

One thing you cannot deny is history. Abu Bakr & Umar were the two greatest leaders the ummah ever had after the Prophet (saw). Not Ali nor anyone else.

Just look at their achievements, their rule.

They were greater leaders than all the other leaders of the ummah put together including Ali.

Ali had his merits & may have been superior to others in terms of knowledge etc but in terms of leadership there are only two i.e the shaykhan.

So those that accepted the leadership of Abu Bakr & Umar made the best decision as the Ummah florished to its greatest point under their rule.





Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 01:18:34 PM
The Ansaar gathered in Saqifa to chose their own tribal leader. No one gave them the authority to decide on behalf of the Prophet (s) who shall succeed him and neither on behalf of the Ummah who shall be their leader.

When Abu Bakr and Omar heard of this they quietly slipped away with only one person with them. They opposed the Ansaar and put them off the idea. It's all there in history. One thing led to another and the outcome was that Abu Bakr became Khalifa by a minority.

The majority were in mourning and weren't aware of what was going on behind the scenes in secrecy. Those days we didn't have the technology that we have now.

This is a different situation than where as the funeral was done and a few days of mourning went by and everybody got together and took part and finally reached a collective decision that Abu Bakr was elected as Khalifa and successor to the Prophet (s).

It was a coincidence in Saqifa and it was conducted fairly or properly. The procedure and process was entirety wrong. So accept the facts which you don't respond to and get over it.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Abu Muhammad on September 29, 2017, 02:22:26 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 02:27:25 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 02:35:38 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

I will see what he answers, but according to my research, Abu Baker and Umar were two sorcerers and were chosen to leaders by the dark forces, not normal leaders, but leaders that think they are avatars and think they are care takers of humanity, and they did it to harm Islam, not out of greed for power or anything, but used power a means to slowly but surely poison Islam.  They had a plan during Prophet lifetime to make a mass propaganda that does away with a very well known miracle of the Prophet (that he had a supernatural good scent), and the only way to seal the deal with that propaganda would be to finally kill him.  They wanted him dead and that to mass propagate that all the miracles claimed were lies but when Suratal Tahreem was revealed, they saw that their plans were misguided and that it was turning against them. Also Aisha and Hafsa turned to repentance that time and took side of the Nabi while these two were essential in the original plan.

These two believed in the Shayateen and Jinn, and didn't believe in Mohammad (pbuh&hf). They instigated their daughters to turn against the Prophet by which God revealed a revelation, in which showed God and his Messenger aware of the plans of they hypocrites but at the same, trying to save these two woman, to not be like the wives of Nuh and Lut, and to be obey the Prophet and with respect to the Pharoah, be like Asiya and ask God to save them from the ones commanding to them to plan against the Nabi.

Read Suratal Tahreem, indeed it showed a plot during his lifetime let alone after.



Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on September 29, 2017, 02:46:51 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

I will see what he answers, but according to my research, Abu Baker and Umar were two sorcerers and were chosen to leaders by the dark forces, not normal leaders, but leaders that think they are avatars and think they are care takers of humanity, and they did it to harm Islam, not out of greed for power or anything, but used power a means to slowly but surely poison Islam.  They had a plan during Prophet lifetime to make a mass propaganda that does away with a very well known miracle of the Prophet (that he had a supernatural good scent), and the only way to seal the deal with that propaganda would be to finally kill him.  They wanted him dead and that to mass propagate that all the miracles claimed were lies but when Suratal Tahreem was revealed, they saw that their plans were misguided and that it was turning against them. Also Aisha and Hafsa turned to repentance that time and took side of the Nabi while these two were essential in the original plan.

These two believed in the Shayateen and Jinn, and didn't believe in Mohammad (pbuh&hf). They instigated their daughters to turn against the Prophet by which God revealed a revelation, in which showed God and his Messenger aware of the plans of they hypocrites but at the same, trying to save these two woman, to not be like the wives of Nuh and Lut, and to be obey the Prophet and with respect to the Pharoah, be like Asiya and ask God to save them from the ones commanding to them to plan against the Nabi.

Read Suratal Tahreem, indeed it showed a plot during his lifetime let alone after.

Right leaders of darkness that lead the ummah to its greatest period. Yeh okay.

Here's the thing. Ali & rest of ahle bayt weren't perfect.
Its easy to pick out the faults of any human being. But ahlus sunnah love ahle bayt & are not in the business of exposing their faults.

Heck, even many members of ahle bayt/Ali's offspring did not get on with eachother.

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 02:48:03 PM
Suratal Tahreem shows the darkest of all plots.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 02:50:54 PM
Abu Baker period:

1. Burned hadith books and forbid the writting of ahadith and we hear lame excuses to this.
2. Killed people for believing in a false Prophet and go against the whole argument of freedom of religion in Quran, by which killing people for leaving Islam would have to be justified.
3. Killed people for not giving him zakat.

What was so great about this?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 02:56:35 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

I will see what he answers, but according to my research, Abu Baker and Umar were two sorcerers and were chosen to leaders by the dark forces, not normal leaders, but leaders that think they are avatars and think they are care takers of humanity, and they did it to harm Islam, not out of greed for power or anything, but used power a means to slowly but surely poison Islam.  They had a plan during Prophet lifetime to make a mass propaganda that does away with a very well known miracle of the Prophet (that he had a supernatural good scent), and the only way to seal the deal with that propaganda would be to finally kill him.  They wanted him dead and that to mass propagate that all the miracles claimed were lies but when Suratal Tahreem was revealed, they saw that their plans were misguided and that it was turning against them. Also Aisha and Hafsa turned to repentance that time and took side of the Nabi while these two were essential in the original plan.

These two believed in the Shayateen and Jinn, and didn't believe in Mohammad (pbuh&hf). They instigated their daughters to turn against the Prophet by which God revealed a revelation, in which showed God and his Messenger aware of the plans of they hypocrites but at the same, trying to save these two woman, to not be like the wives of Nuh and Lut, and to be obey the Prophet and with respect to the Pharoah, be like Asiya and ask God to save them from the ones commanding to them to plan against the Nabi.

Read Suratal Tahreem, indeed it showed a plot during his lifetime let alone after.






WHAT A  RIGHTLOAD OF CODSWALLOP
YOU EVIL MAN

Please mods if this guy hasn't any proof to back his lies of our Sahaba ra then please could you delete such posts.........whether he is mental or not.

I would rather see arguments with proof and not just hearsay and lies like this guy has been doing for ages and getting away with it.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 03:01:43 PM
You wouldn't accept proof of this no matter how clear the case is made.

We see you don't accept the Leadership and Authority of Ahlulbayt (as) in the first place.

And among the proofs:

http://www.duas.org/alaviya/dua-120.htm
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on September 29, 2017, 03:07:01 PM
Abu Baker period:

1. Burned hadith books and forbid the writting of ahadith and we hear lame excuses to this.
2. Killed people for believing in a false Prophet and go against the whole argument of freedom of religion in Quran, by which killing people for leaving Islam would have to be justified.
3. Killed people for not giving him zakat.

What was so great about this?

1) hadiths should never have been written down. Its only because the later on the ummah had no choice due to the amount of liars.

Abu Bakr couldn't stop every recording of a hadith being written down even if he wanted.

So that argument is weak.

2) those who believed in the false prophet fought the muslims hence why they were dealt with

3) these people rebelled against the state. Again they were dealt with accordingly.


Now how about we go through the great achievements of Abu Bakr & Umar's leadership?

Here one that alone will shine bright way over your cult:


The islamic lands spread to such size & strength, with all prominent sahaba & figures UNITED under their leadership INCLUDING ALI & HIS SONS.




Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 03:11:47 PM
No need to write hadith books is laughable.  There was plenty of DIRE NEED.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 03:12:15 PM
And if there was no need, doesn't mean you forbid it.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on September 29, 2017, 03:17:26 PM
No need to write hadith books is laughable.  There was plenty of DIRE NEED.

Why was there a need to write hadith if you had a living infallible Imam with another 11 to succeed him?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 03:18:36 PM
Abu Baker period:

1. Burned hadith books and forbid the writting of ahadith and we hear lame excuses to this.
2. Killed people for believing in a false Prophet and go against the whole argument of freedom of religion in Quran, by which killing people for leaving Islam would have to be justified.
3. Killed people for not giving him zakat.

What was so great about this?

1) hadiths should never have been written down. Its only because the later on the ummah had no choice due to the amount of liars.

Abu Bakr couldn't stop every recording of a hadith being written down even if he wanted.

So that argument is weak.

2) those who believed in the false prophet fought the muslims hence why they were dealt with

3) these people rebelled against the state. Again they were dealt with accordingly.


Now how about we go through the great achievements of Abu Bakr & Umar's leadership?

Here one that alone will shine bright way over your cult:


The islamic lands spread to such size & strength, with all prominent sahaba & figures UNITED under their leadership INCLUDING ALI & HIS SONS.

Ok, suppose you justify all the history recorded by YOUR books.

According to the following Du'a: http://www.duas.org/alaviya/dua-120.htm

"have killed their supporters"

So the supporters of Ali according to this Du'a maybe those who refused Zakat? Maybe really it was nothing to do with zakat, but zakat was just an outward reality of their rebellion and holding on to supporting Ali?

You keep claiming unity except:

1. Those who refused zakat.

By what reasons did they have to refuse zakat? What reason did they have to rebel?

Was it just interpretation of whether zakat goes to government or not, and if so, was that worth killing them? Or was it they believed Zakat was no longer a pillar because Nabi was not in power, but that hardly makes sense....

Don't you see something fishy when hadith books are burned and they are forbidden to be recorded....don't you find all this talk of unity just that talk, when perhaps many people were killed ON EXCUSE of not paying zakat?

What better way to cover up some people supported Ali and were killed but to make it soley about zakat?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 03:22:36 PM
No need to write hadith books is laughable.  There was plenty of DIRE NEED.

Why was there a need to write hadith if you had a living infallible Imam with another 11 to succeed him?

There is plenty of reasons and not one reason not to be not recording hadith given that case.  The Imams aren't just hear to repeat the Sunnah, they were here to implement it, perfect the light of leadership of God through his chosen ones, perfect the Quranic leadership which is intertwined with them.

And what they emphasize on, during their time, their words given their situation, all that is important and vital.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on September 29, 2017, 03:24:01 PM
Abu Baker period:

1. Burned hadith books and forbid the writting of ahadith and we hear lame excuses to this.
2. Killed people for believing in a false Prophet and go against the whole argument of freedom of religion in Quran, by which killing people for leaving Islam would have to be justified.
3. Killed people for not giving him zakat.

What was so great about this?

1) hadiths should never have been written down. Its only because the later on the ummah had no choice due to the amount of liars.

Abu Bakr couldn't stop every recording of a hadith being written down even if he wanted.

So that argument is weak.

2) those who believed in the false prophet fought the muslims hence why they were dealt with

3) these people rebelled against the state. Again they were dealt with accordingly.


Now how about we go through the great achievements of Abu Bakr & Umar's leadership?

Here one that alone will shine bright way over your cult:


The islamic lands spread to such size & strength, with all prominent sahaba & figures UNITED under their leadership INCLUDING ALI & HIS SONS.

Ok, suppose you justify all the history recorded by YOUR books.

According to the following Du'a: http://www.duas.org/alaviya/dua-120.htm

"have killed their supporters"

So the supporters of Ali according to this Du'a maybe those who refused Zakat? Maybe really it was nothing to do with zakat, but zakat was just an outward reality of their rebellion and holding on to supporting Ali?

You keep claiming unity except:

1. Those who refused zakat.

By what reasons did they have to refuse zakat? What reason did they have to rebel?

Was it just interpretation of whether zakat goes to government or not, and if so, was that worth killing them? Or was it they believed Zakat was no longer a pillar because Nabi was not in power, but that hardly makes sense....

Don't you see something fishy when hadith books are burned and they are forbidden to be recorded....don't you find all this talk of unity just that talk, when perhaps many people were killed ON EXCUSE of not paying zakat?

What better way to cover up some people supported Ali and were killed but to make it soley about zakat?

Why do you think everything that has ever occurred on this planet is linked to Ali?
In fact don't answer that on second thoughts...

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 03:26:07 PM
You wouldn't accept proof of this no matter how clear the case is made.

We see you don't accept the Leadership and Authority of Ahlulbayt (as) in the first place.

And among the proofs:

http://www.duas.org/alaviya/dua-120.htm

You haven't got proof you've got a load of old unsubstantiated fairytale garbage stories backed up by your dead brain which feeds off the whisperings of the devil.

The leadership the authority is gone long gone let's talk here and now, we will not be asked about authority or leadership once your eating dust 6 feet under, Ali ra nor any ahlebaith ra can help you no imams nothing, it's boring its old and your brains getting worse thinking of what could've been should've been would've been.......snap out of it.

You call that proof???
You have no chains, reaffirming what I say about you lying, you have so much hate inside you that the devils love playing with your emotions hence your all over the place like a ship stuck in heavy seas without a sale or captain just sailing hitting every rock it comes across ready to sink.......beaware your not far from sinking either if you don't provide evidence, a sale to steer your ship.

😜
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on September 29, 2017, 03:27:30 PM
No need to write hadith books is laughable.  There was plenty of DIRE NEED.

Why was there a need to write hadith if you had a living infallible Imam with another 11 to succeed him?

There is plenty of reasons and not one reason not to be not recording hadith given that case.  The Imams aren't just hear to repeat the Sunnah, they were here to implement it, perfect the light of leadership of God through his chosen ones, perfect the Quranic leadership which is intertwined with them.

And what they emphasize on, during their time, their words given their situation, all that is important and vital.

Okay so I have a living infallible leader yet I need to record hadith even though there will be another living infallible guide after him & so on & so on...

Yeh you're making a lot of sense.

Sorcerers, dark people, ghosts, bumps through the night...lay off the hard stuff mate!
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 03:30:41 PM
The name of God is by which people perish or attain salvation.

Ali held that station.  Dark forces have been trying to hide people from that station always, they always try to put out God's light by slogans and words.

The truth is with Ali and Ali is with truth, and hence, everything has become related to him. Prophets were rejected because dark forces didn't want to see the just leadership of the chosen ones occur.

They didn't want the world to be prepared for Mohammad and the Mastership and Leadership he would preach, and which Quran would call to.

According to Quran, dark forces succeeded over all in misguiding humanity and doing away with the truth.

You guys want to believe everything turned rosey after Prophet's death but everything Quran exposes, shows, the opposite.

It shows it's impossible for it to have been rosy history unless Satan went to sleep or something or started to love humanity or something.  The only way it would of made it to justice and been on course to guiding humanity would be through the Navigators and Captains of the covenant of God, mainly the Twelve Successors.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on September 29, 2017, 03:33:29 PM
The name of God is by which people perish or attain salvation.

Ali held that station.  Dark forces have been trying to hide people from that station always, they always try to put out God's light by slogans and words.

The truth is with Ali and Ali is with truth, and hence, everything has become related to him. Prophets were rejected because dark forces didn't want to see the just leadership of the chosen ones occur.

They didn't want the world to be prepared for Mohammad and the Mastership and Leadership he would preach, and which Quran would call to.

According to Quran, dark forces succeeded over all in misguiding humanity and doing away with the truth.

You guys want to believe everything turned rosey after Prophet's death but everything Quran exposes, shows, the opposite.

It shows it's impossible for it to have been rosy history unless Satan went to sleep or something or started to love humanity or something.  The only way it would of made it to justice and been on course to guiding humanity would be through the Navigators and Captains of the covenant of God, mainly the Twelve Successors.

No it wasn't all rosey.

It was as close to rosey as you can get though during the rule of the first two caliphs.

Not perfect but the best leaders this ummah has ever had since the prophet (saw).

You've been watching too many underworld vampire movies...


Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 03:41:23 PM
Your the one who shows the attributes of the shaytaan........HATE!
You represent that hate by manifesting and using it on people you have no proof or evidence that they worked against Islam or Prophet saw, hence reaffirming my belief that you have devils whispering in your ear daily nightly without you being aware.

Your proof to me was a dua written nearly a millennia later and MAGICALLY it is a proof against whom you accuse?? Are you for real? People in here think your on drugs, I don't, I genuinely believe some devils knocking your nugget around in that empty skull of yours making you feel like your on a trip......sailing.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 03:44:51 PM
Your the one who shows the attributes of the shaytaan........HATE!
You represent that hate by manifesting and using it on people you have no proof or evidence that they worked against Islam or Prophet saw, hence reaffirming my belief that you have devils whispering in your ear daily nightly without you being aware.

Your proof to me was a dua written nearly a millennia later and MAGICALLY it is a proof against whom you accuse?? Are you for real? People in here think your on drugs, I don't, I genuinely believe some devils knocking your nugget around in that empty skull of yours making you feel like your on a trip......sailing.

LOL! And this is the camp that Kian has joined. LOL!
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 03:48:17 PM
how do you prove that without circular reasoning?

We are right because we follow Abu Baker and Umar as opposed to the Shiites who reject them.
How do you know they are good? Because our hadiths say so, our history says, our scholars say so....

etc. etc...

I showed a Du'a attributed to Ali that shows alternative history view. How do you know which one is correct?

It's time to refer things back to Quran primarily, and use Sunnah to unlock it's bright signs.

No more conjecture, forget your books for one second, forget the conjecture of Rijaal which you call ilmel rijaal for one second....

Is Quran showing something that cannot be proven? Or is showing a sacred history that is the only thing that could have possibly happened given what we know about God and his signs, and what we know about how the world is all over the place?

Is it showing history from the viewpoint of things that are possible to happen but possible to not happen, or it showing given what we know of the world today,   this is surely what must have happened.

When God tells us of the sacred history of his Messengers, he is emphasizing on essential truths, revealing the structure of the world from it's evil side as well as it's bright side.

He reveals his plan and why his plan has not occurred and been fulfilled, but that he plans and plans again and again,  always in benefit of humanity.

Hardly anyone moves an ounce to help him because they become fatalists. They turn away from the proof offered in Quran because it goes against their caprice and requires humility in form of sincere grief and repentance.

And the Navigators to the just city, the doors to ascension, the leaders who guide by his command, and the Captains are vitally important.

Their number in each covenant after the founder is also important.   All this has been clearly emphasized and explained, and with the sacred history, the truth has been proven and admonishment has occurred to the believers.



Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 03:49:56 PM
Your the one who shows the attributes of the shaytaan........HATE!
You represent that hate by manifesting and using it on people you have no proof or evidence that they worked against Islam or Prophet saw, hence reaffirming my belief that you have devils whispering in your ear daily nightly without you being aware.

Your proof to me was a dua written nearly a millennia later and MAGICALLY it is a proof against whom you accuse?? Are you for real? People in here think your on drugs, I don't, I genuinely believe some devils knocking your nugget around in that empty skull of yours making you feel like your on a trip......sailing.

LOL! And this is the camp that Kian has joined. LOL!

LOL better than being in a camp believing in fairytale succession stories LOL
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 04:02:13 PM
how do you prove that without circular reasoning?

We are right because we follow Abu Baker and Umar as opposed to the Shiites who reject them.
How do you know they are good? Because our hadiths say so, our history says, our scholars say so....

etc. etc...

I showed a Du'a attributed to Ali that shows alternative history view. How do you know which one is correct?

It's time to refer things back to Quran primarily, and use Sunnah to unlock it's bright signs.

No more conjecture, forget your books for one second, forget the conjecture of Rijaal which you call ilmel rijaal for one second....

Is Quran showing something that cannot be proven? Or is showing a sacred history that is the only thing that could have possibly happened given what we know about God and his signs, and what we know about how the world is all over the place?

Is it showing history from the viewpoint of things that are possible to happen but possible to not happen, or it showing given what we know of the world today,   this is surely what must have happened.

When God tells us of the sacred history of his Messengers, he is emphasizing on essential truths, revealing the structure of the world from it's evil side as well as it's bright side.

He reveals his plan and why his plan has not occurred and been fulfilled, but that he plans and plans again and again,  always in benefit of humanity.

Hardly anyone moves an ounce to help him because they become fatalists. They turn away from the proof offered in Quran because it goes against their caprice and requires humility in form of sincere grief and repentance.

And the Navigators to the just city, the doors to ascension, the leaders who guide by his command, and the Captains are vitally important.

Their number in each covenant after the founder is also important.   All this has been clearly emphasized and explained, and with the sacred history, the truth has been proven and admonishment has occurred to the believers.






You dua has.....NO CHAINS......it could've been cooked up in some back alley, it's that simple.

Our proof of goodness of Sahaba ra is backed by Hadith authentic Hadith backed by the sayings of the close generation at the time of prophet saw all scrutinised and authenticated through rijal.

You cannot even back up your claim by using clear quranic evidences either.

Your drowning in your own sea my friend you have no proof to hold onto.

As for Abu Bakr ra in the noble Quran "He being the second of the two, When they were in the cave and when Muhammad said to his companion 'Grieve not, surely God is with us,' then God came to their help, and protected them with an army which they saw not". {9:40}


All you have is some fake made up dua written by a hater possibly a lover of the devil.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 04:05:31 PM
Your the one who shows the attributes of the shaytaan........HATE!
You represent that hate by manifesting and using it on people you have no proof or evidence that they worked against Islam or Prophet saw, hence reaffirming my belief that you have devils whispering in your ear daily nightly without you being aware.

Your proof to me was a dua written nearly a millennia later and MAGICALLY it is a proof against whom you accuse?? Are you for real? People in here think your on drugs, I don't, I genuinely believe some devils knocking your nugget around in that empty skull of yours making you feel like your on a trip......sailing.

It's ironic that you choose to hate the only people who do follow proofs from God and hold on to his rope and don't mix authority with the authority of God,   solely because it has been accepted from them their state, their creed, their path, and your actions are not accepted, you grow in stubbornness to the proof and rebel.

While the alternative path is to sincerely repent, and then take the path to being guided to the reminder, and the family of the reminder.

Make Quran your Imam through the Imam of time,  realizing he is the remembrance and the one who if you are to recite Quran truly by, it will be through him "by the name of God is it's sailing and anchoring".

You guys have gone to the degree you mock the concept of navigators and Captains, though Quran emphasized on ships in many Surahs and related with many subjects, and use the word Captain himself.

You mock that which Quran discusses, you mock the issue of dark forces and magic as if not real, as if I been watching to much movies or something.

But I believe in magic mainly because I witness it on the hearts of humanity, I see the clear proofs and reminders to God, but people don't even know the proofs for God in Quran.... and I see the proof for Prophethood and the 12 Successors to the final Prophet in Quran clearly, but people are heedless to it.

I don't think good forces would deceive the masses and keep people from understanding book to keep people from it's evil, no rather it makes more sense that it as it says, Satan and his forces who wish to keep people away from the light though they may have their benevolent explanation of why they do what they do.

I choose to reflect, and it has broken so many locks on Quran, and I look forward to the Quran the more I break of its locks through the help of God.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 04:12:06 PM


Quote
You dua has.....NO CHAINS......it could've been cooked up in some back alley, it's that simple.

We have chains that are deemed authentic by Shiite scholars naming the Twelve Imams. Would you believe on that basis? So not let us kid ourselves on this chain business.

I ask you again how do you prove your version of history as opposed as to what is in that Du'a?  As for me, the Du'a is proof for me for reasons other than its chains just as the Quran is proof for me for reasons other than it's chains.


Quote
You cannot even back up your claim by using clear quranic evidences either.

I can and have, and am certain through Quran that what I stated is exactly what has occurred.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Abu Muhammad on September 29, 2017, 04:54:05 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

I will see what he answers, but according to my research, Abu Baker and Umar were two sorcerers and were chosen to leaders by the dark forces, not normal leaders, but leaders that think they are avatars and think they are care takers of humanity, and they did it to harm Islam, not out of greed for power or anything, but used power a means to slowly but surely poison Islam.  They had a plan during Prophet lifetime to make a mass propaganda that does away with a very well known miracle of the Prophet (that he had a supernatural good scent), and the only way to seal the deal with that propaganda would be to finally kill him.  They wanted him dead and that to mass propagate that all the miracles claimed were lies but when Suratal Tahreem was revealed, they saw that their plans were misguided and that it was turning against them. Also Aisha and Hafsa turned to repentance that time and took side of the Nabi while these two were essential in the original plan.

These two believed in the Shayateen and Jinn, and didn't believe in Mohammad (pbuh&hf). They instigated their daughters to turn against the Prophet by which God revealed a revelation, in which showed God and his Messenger aware of the plans of they hypocrites but at the same, trying to save these two woman, to not be like the wives of Nuh and Lut, and to be obey the Prophet and with respect to the Pharoah, be like Asiya and ask God to save them from the ones commanding to them to plan against the Nabi.

Read Suratal Tahreem, indeed it showed a plot during his lifetime let alone after.

@Link,

Please take your mental pills. You sound just like a Majoos who was just overrun by Umar Ibn Al-Khattab 1,400 years ago...
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Abu Muhammad on September 29, 2017, 05:10:00 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

@iceman, any thought?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 05:31:26 PM


Quote
You dua has.....NO CHAINS......it could've been cooked up in some back alley, it's that simple.

We have chains that are deemed authentic by Shiite scholars naming the Twelve Imams. Would you believe on that basis? So not let us kid ourselves on this chain business.

I ask you again how do you prove your version of history as opposed as to what is in that Du'a?  As for me, the Du'a is proof for me for reasons other than its chains just as the Quran is proof for me for reasons other than it's chains.


Quote
You cannot even back up your claim by using clear quranic evidences either.

I can and have, and am certain through Quran that what I stated is exactly what has occurred.

What?  "That are DEEMED authentic by Shiite scholars" ???? Did you take the pill in your mouth or did you stick it somewhere else???
Deemed?? Is this your proof?? You base your proof on some scholar considered, supposed its authentic??? All your nonsense posts have been supported by this nonsense?

Oh boy even iceman can't help you here mate LOL

Nothing you have ZERO proof and sub zero understanding hence your talking GIBBERISH.

Again no proofs just a made up dua written by haters of Islam and that too you cannot authenticate either. You follow fake stuff get over it or bring your proof otherwise you are an evil hater of Islam.

Your lost you cannot even get evidences and truths and yet you blabber on and on and on..........hypocrite
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 29, 2017, 08:15:25 PM
Breath and re-read what I said.

Indeed the Quran contains all things pertaining to the guidance of humans.

It exposes the dark forces for what they and those fooled by them for what they are, and there is no excuse to not follow the reminder after clarification from the Messenger and his holy family.

You can't even accept the proofs in Quran regarding leadership, and defend the Taghut almost as it is what gives you life, so please don't tell me proofs.

There are many proofs for who Abu Baker and Umar truly are but keep believing what you want about them, see where it leads you in understanding Quran.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 09:05:29 PM
According to the Hadith that Hani mentioned one should love, respect and follow the Ansaar. Now the Ansaar gathered in Saqifa, why? To select their leader. Did Abu Bakr and Omar allow them? No they didn't. So why didn't they obey and follow the Hadith?
So now you want to twist the hadith and said it is about "follow the Ansar"? Hani clearly said the hadith about Ali & Ansar do not mean that we should follow everything they did. You did not read Hani's reply did you? 😊

Another question that why did the Ansaar gather in Saqifa on their own to select their leader?
Because they have never heard Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam told them they should elect Ali or Abu Bakr or anyone. Sunni's answer is so logical & simple, no crazy conspiracy theory at all 😁

Because they knew and were witnessing the events what the Mohajeroon were up to. What ever happened in Saqifa and what ever the outcome, was this according to the Qoran and Sunah? The answer is clearly NO.
Oh really, the Ansar knew what Abu Bakr/Umar were up to and you believed they opposed that and yet still selected Abu Bakr. Whats the point of that gathering then? The more excuses, the more laughable it is

Why did only the Ansaar gather in Saqifa to appoint a leader a successor to Muhammad (s) when this should be the responsibility of the entire Ummah as a whole and should involve everybody, all parties concerned and involved should have took part.

What was the sudden urge and need to gather in Saqifa on your own when the funeral processions are going on and the Muslim Ummah is in state of shock and mourning?

The Shaykhain were only informed of this secret gathering. And when they got to know they quietly slipped away with one named individual, why? Why weren't the others informed?

The Ansaar gathered to select their own leader because of the stance of certain reputable Muhajir who had influence and position. They (Ansaar) knew that the these Muhajir will not accept Ali and will not allow him to succeed.

They saw the pattern of disobedience by not joining Osama's army, not allowing the Prophet (s) to write a will when he asked for pen and paper and caused a fuss over it. The secrecy and planning  was whispered around and got to the Ansaar.

Your replies are getting more lame each time.

I hate to break it to you, but here's something you need to understand:

The world did not & does not revolve around Ali.

The ansar wanted to install one of their own & if they felt Ali was chosen by the prophet then they would have chosen Ali too.
In the end they accepted Abu Bakr.

One thing you cannot deny is history. Abu Bakr & Umar were the two greatest leaders the ummah ever had after the Prophet (saw). Not Ali nor anyone else.

Just look at their achievements, their rule.

They were greater leaders than all the other leaders of the ummah put together including Ali.

Ali had his merits & may have been superior to others in terms of knowledge etc but in terms of leadership there are only two i.e the shaykhan.

So those that accepted the leadership of Abu Bakr & Umar made the best decision as the Ummah florished to its greatest point under their rule.

You're absolutely right that the world does not revolve around Ali. It revolves around those who Allah removed rijs from and whom Allah purified to the state of purification. Explain to me this in your own words and time. Give me an intellectual argument based on knowledge and facts. Don't give me things based on personality worship.

History tells us something completely different than what you have put forward. Saqifa and its outcome has got nothing to do with Qoran and Sunah. It's an insult to the Prophet (s) and labels him (s) irresponsible that he left the Ummah in disarray.

We don't believe in such nonsense. Anything that goes against the Qoran and Sunah we do not accept. Learn to respect others faith and belief and refrain from getting personal.

We have the book, one weighty thing, that gives principles, rules and regulations. And we have the progeny, the other weighty thing, which is the leadership and who ate the guvnors to take care of the Muslim affairs.

Some had their own intentions and you can believe in what ever you want. But this is exactly who we are and what we believe in.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 09:19:21 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

The question doesn't even arise. It's got absolutely nothing to do with Abu Bakr, Omar or anyone else. Allah introduced the book (Qoran) through Muhammad (s) and Allah introduced leadership (Ahle Bayth) also through Muhammad (s).

Muhammad (s) left two, not only one and just the Qoran but two weighty things behind and we hold on to both of them and that is the book of Allah, the Qoran and the progeny, the leadership.

You keep bringing in Abu Bakr and Omar, this and that and struggle to justify the stage drama in Saqifa which absolutely has got nothing to do with Qoran and Sunah what so ever.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 09:34:49 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 09:38:59 PM
Breath and re-read what I said.

Indeed the Quran contains all things pertaining to the guidance of humans.

It exposes the dark forces for what they and those fooled by them for what they are, and there is no excuse to not follow the reminder after clarification from the Messenger and his holy family.

You can't even accept the proofs in Quran regarding leadership, and defend the Taghut almost as it is what gives you life, so please don't tell me proofs.

There are many proofs for who Abu Baker and Umar truly are but keep believing what you want about them, see where it leads you in understanding Quran.

Still no proof but assumptions, come on link you have NOTHING of substance, you rely on unauthentic rumours propbably the whispering of shayateen in your head that's it.

Nothing but conjecture, your ships sailing on flimsy proofs with big holes in the sales and  the captains not there he is hiding for the last millennia, that alone smashes your cooked up theory of steering ships and captains.

You are an evil lying person who curses prophet saw's ahlubaith ra and His companions ra on weak flimsy made up night time tales, heck you cannot even find a chain for the saname quraish dua, is this what you build your faith on?? You curse and you hate coz of this unauthentic piece of garbage???

You couldn't open a lock with a key never mind opening locks in the Quran
(Whatever that means)
 
Astaghfirullah
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 09:39:40 PM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

I will see what he answers, but according to my research, Abu Baker and Umar were two sorcerers and were chosen to leaders by the dark forces, not normal leaders, but leaders that think they are avatars and think they are care takers of humanity, and they did it to harm Islam, not out of greed for power or anything, but used power a means to slowly but surely poison Islam.  They had a plan during Prophet lifetime to make a mass propaganda that does away with a very well known miracle of the Prophet (that he had a supernatural good scent), and the only way to seal the deal with that propaganda would be to finally kill him.  They wanted him dead and that to mass propagate that all the miracles claimed were lies but when Suratal Tahreem was revealed, they saw that their plans were misguided and that it was turning against them. Also Aisha and Hafsa turned to repentance that time and took side of the Nabi while these two were essential in the original plan.

These two believed in the Shayateen and Jinn, and didn't believe in Mohammad (pbuh&hf). They instigated their daughters to turn against the Prophet by which God revealed a revelation, in which showed God and his Messenger aware of the plans of they hypocrites but at the same, trying to save these two woman, to not be like the wives of Nuh and Lut, and to be obey the Prophet and with respect to the Pharoah, be like Asiya and ask God to save them from the ones commanding to them to plan against the Nabi.

Read Suratal Tahreem, indeed it showed a plot during his lifetime let alone after.

Right leaders of darkness that lead the ummah to its greatest period. Yeh okay.

Here's the thing. Ali & rest of ahle bayt weren't perfect.
Its easy to pick out the faults of any human being. But ahlus sunnah love ahle bayt & are not in the business of exposing their faults.

Heck, even many members of ahle bayt/Ali's offspring did not get on with eachother.

Just one question, explain to me the verse of Tat'heer in full detail. 'To remove rijs from you and to purify you to the state of purification' explain this to me.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 09:49:24 PM
If Muhammad (s) died without nominating his heir and successor, he is laid open to the charge of dereliction of duty. Whoever claims that he did not nominate his successor, is suggesting that he launched the frail vessel of Islam on turbulent seas without a compass, without a rudder, without an anchor and without a captain, and left it completely at the mercy of wind and wave.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 10:00:42 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 10:02:49 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????

You are so funny. You really make me laugh. Did he? Any references?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 10:05:31 PM
Also, it is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari that Umar said: “When he (the Apostle) died, the Ansar opposed us. They gathered in the Saqifa Banu Sa'eda. Ali, Zubayr and their friends also opposed us.”
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 10:13:58 PM
The Sunni Muslims say that Abu Bakr and Omar were the principal companions of Muhammad (s). It were both of them, the principal companions, who seized the government of Medina at a time when Ali and all members of Banu Hashim were busy with his obsequies.

As soon as the Prophet died, his principal companions gathered in the outhouse of Saqifa to claim leadership of the community. This leadership, in their opinion, was so important that they could not pause even to bury their dead master and benefactor.

The naked struggle for power erupted within minutes of the death of the Prophet. Zamakhshari, one of the most authoritative Sunni scholars and historians, writes in this connection:

“It was the consensus of all the companions that after the death of the Prophet they had to appoint his successor immediately. They believed that doing so was more important than even to attend the funeral of their master. It was this importance that prompted Abu Bakr and Omar to address the crowd of Muslims.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 10:23:17 PM
During the last ten years of his life, Muhammad (s) organized more than eighty expeditions. He sent out many of them under the command of some officer; others he led in person.

Whenever Muhammad (s) sent out an expedition, he appointed one of his companions as its captain. He ordered the rankers to obey him, and he made him (the captain) answerable to himself.

When the expedition returned to Medina, he debriefed the captain. It never so happened that he told the members of an expedition or a reconnaissance party that they had to elect or select their own captain.

In the event when Muhammad (s) was himself leading an expedition out of Medina, he appointed a governor for the city, and made him responsible for maintaining law and order during his own absence. He never told the citizens that in his absence, it was their duty to elect or select a governor for themselves.

In 630 when Muhammad (s) captured Makkah, and incorporated it into the new State, he appointed an administrator for that city, and he did so without consulting either the Makkans or his own companions.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 10:25:39 PM
If Muhammad (s) died without nominating his heir and successor, he is laid open to the charge of dereliction of duty. Whoever claims that he did not nominate his successor, is suggesting that he launched the frail vessel of Islam on turbulent seas without a compass, without a rudder, without an anchor and without a captain, and left it completely at the mercy of wind and wave.

Oh boy another wannabe sailor of the high seas😂

Yes it's people like you who believe in such garbage astaghfirullah, just coz you cannot find a link from Quran or sunnah just becoz you cannot EXPLAIN your divine Imamate theory to a Muslim you will blame the prophet saw of dereliction of duty??????

ASTAGHFIRULLAH ASTAGHFIRULLAH ASTAGHFIRULLAH

Do you even realise what filth your opening your mind upto??
Look at link the guy is lost to devil whisperings and you are lowering the status of Nabi Mohammed saw just coz we don't believe in a divine imam on appointment from Allah swt.

We say He saw FULLY ACCOMPLISHED HIS MISSION before He saw left the world

I think it must be that dark magic which is common amongst shia that keeps pushing them to this divine Imamate appointment theory......ask link HE KNOWS😜

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 29, 2017, 10:29:49 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????

You are so funny. You really make me laugh. Did he? Any references?

Yes your laughing now that your 10 points have COLLAPSED lol

It's common knowledge within ahlusunna it's EASILY available online, it's not my fault if you havent done your homework or.......copy paste work😜👍
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 11:12:26 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????

You are so funny. You really make me laugh. Did he? Any references?

Yes your laughing now that your 10 points have COLLAPSED lol

It's common knowledge within ahlusunna it's EASILY available online, it's not my fault if you havent done your homework or.......copy paste work😜👍

My ten points didn't collapse, you just brushed them aside. It's never your fault. The other side is always to blame. Common knowledge within Ahlesunah, pull the other one.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 11:21:31 PM
Here is the first evidence from the Qoran about third in line in authority after Muhammad (s);

"O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 11:30:53 PM
Here is the second evidence from the Qoran about third in line in authority after Muhammad (s);

"Your ally is none but Allah and [therefore] His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship]."
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 11:42:57 PM
And who exactly are the ones who are classified as the Ulul Amre and obedience towards them has been mentioned in the Quran?

Who are the ones who Allah has mentioned as Wali alongside himself and his Messenger (s)?

These two verses are more than enough to understand and accept that Allah has put someone third in line in authority in sequence and alongside himself and his Messenger (s).

And who are they? Well lets ask Allah and see in the Qoran.

"Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet's] household, and to purify you with [extensive] purification."

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 29, 2017, 11:57:28 PM
Others added their support, and Abu Bakr was made the first caliph. This choice was disputed by some of Muhammad's companions, who believed that Ali (Ali ibn Abi Talib), the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law, had already been designated as his successor by the Prophet.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 12:01:33 AM
Which of you, then, will help me in this, and be my brother, mine executor and my successor amongst you?’ All remained silent, except for the youthful ʿAlī who spoke up: ‘O Prophet of God, I will be thy helper in this.’ The Prophet then placed his hand on ʿAlī’s neck and said, ‘This is my brother, mine executor and my successor amongst you. Hearken unto him and obey him.’

(Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, tr. A Guilaume, The Life of Muhammad, 118)
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on September 30, 2017, 12:52:53 AM
Why did only the Ansaar gather in Saqifa to appoint a leader a successor to Muhammad (s) when this should be the responsibility of the entire Ummah as a whole and should involve everybody, all parties concerned and involved should have took part.
Ansar was the host, the original inhabitant of Madina, the largest & strongest "camp". A leader passed away and as in any society, they would want a new leader.Its normal Ansar wanted a leader of their own. They have never heard about hocus pocus 12 demigods, the previous leader did not tell them that A or B or C would be their new leader. Your small sect is just a crazy bunch of conspiracy theorist who are void of any ability to understand something as simple as that.

What was the sudden urge and need to gather in Saqifa on your own when the funeral processions are going on and the Muslim Ummah is in state of shock and mourning?
So everything should stop and everyone should stay at home like women who lost their husband? Why don't you ask why "the sudden urge and need to gather in state of shock and mourning" after your 20th century demigod, Khomeini died? Khamenei was selected a week before Khomeini was buried. Feeling more stupid now?

The Shaykhain were only informed of this secret gathering. And when they got to know they quietly slipped away with one named individual, why? Why weren't the others informed?
Yep, it was such a secret gathering of many people in such a known public gathering spot. Come on, keep those crazy theory coming :D

The Ansaar gathered to select their own leader because of the stance of certain reputable Muhajir who had influence and position. They (Ansaar) knew that the these Muhajir will not accept Ali and will not allow him to succeed.
OK, so the Ansar knew and did not like Abu Bakr/Umar so called plan and wanted to prevent it from happening by following Umar in choosing Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance to him. Get a recorder and replay it to yourself. Its too funny.

They saw the pattern of disobedience by not joining Osama's army, not allowing the Prophet (s) to write a will when he asked for pen and paper and caused a fuss over it. The secrecy and planning  was whispered around and got to the Ansaar.
Ansar saw various "pattern of disobedience", they wanted to prevent the conspirators from executing their plan and then Ansar helped the conspirator by selecting them. Man, your bollywood script is a comedy, not a thriller :D
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 30, 2017, 01:37:39 AM
Quran did talk about leadership.

Overall the leaders in the past were Prophets, and overall the Prophets were Messengers.

God didn't say Mohammad is the seal of guides or leaders, but said he is seal of Prophets. All the wisdom of stating there is no Prophets after Mohammad, would apply, to saying there is no leaders and guides appointed by God after. Yet, that is not what we see in Quran.

Not only that, but we see emphasis on the leadership dimension and the authority dimension and kingship dimension and the obedience dimension and being the way dimension and being a navigator dimension and being the light of God dimension of the Prophets emphasized all in context of verses that Shiite hadiths interpret to be about Ahlulbayt. For example Ulil-Amr, family of the reminder, etc....

And we see this Wilayah aspect of the Rasool is emphasized through out Quran as well.

And we not only see emphasis on this, but emphasis that they come as chosen families.

And not only do we see emphasis on chosen families and chosen offspring, but we see emphasis on their exact number, mainly twelve Succeeding Navigators to the founder.

And not only do we see emphasis on the number, we see it argued universally to humanity, recalling the twelve months - recalling the moon and sun cycles, just as Noah recalled nature to show the inward kingdom and Tawheed.

There was a very clean way of God throughout history, but people are trying to make it ambiguous.


And Ulil-Amr are in context in negating the Taghut and Anti-chosen/annointed ones Authorities, context of reminding of the Authority of a chosen family in the past, and afterwards recalling the obedience owed to all Messengers.

And Quran shows when people demand proofs but don't have proofs of their own, it is the case that they want people to follow conjecture and blindness and rejecting clear insights and proofs.

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Abu Muhammad on September 30, 2017, 01:44:33 AM
@iceman,

Quick one. Just want to ask you what are the factors that you think motivate both Abu Bakr and Umar to be the caliphs?

The question doesn't even arise. It's got absolutely nothing to do with Abu Bakr, Omar or anyone else. Allah introduced the book (Qoran) through Muhammad (s) and Allah introduced leadership (Ahle Bayth) also through Muhammad (s).

Muhammad (s) left two, not only one and just the Qoran but two weighty things behind and we hold on to both of them and that is the book of Allah, the Qoran and the progeny, the leadership.

You keep bringing in Abu Bakr and Omar, this and that and struggle to justify the stage drama in Saqifa which absolutely has got nothing to do with Qoran and Sunah what so ever.

It certainly does raise a question. According to you sect, the instruction of Prophet (saw) was such a crystal clear to follow Ahlul Bayt and all of sudden, the sahabah went against the instruction and elected a leader that was not an Ahlul Bayt. So, logically, there must be some factors that motivate those actions.

So, what have you got in thought about the factors?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 30, 2017, 01:58:59 AM
That is an important question, but are you asking it to seek guidance or to argue by falsehood?

This is a more pressing question. No question is bad in itself, but Quran warns not to ask certain type of questions in Quran saying it lead people to disbelief in the past.

And that is the type of questions we see in Quran which are good questions if seeking to learn like "O Rasool, why is it that God sends a human and not an Angel, inform us why and explain why" is different then the tone of "Would God sent a mortal as a Messenger".

The Rasool had a contrained heart that could not spread his knowledge due to what people were saying and often had to wait for revelation to come, just to sort out all the propaganda going on about through revelation.

A question like "Ok, indeed the twelve Successors and Imams are proven in Quran and Sunnah, so how do we gain guidance from the Imam of our time and benefit from him"...different than the tone "What is your Imam doing, let him answer this and that question".

As for the factors,  this is what Quran is showing all the time, factors in the past, to the time of the Nabi, and after.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 08:31:21 AM
Why did only the Ansaar gather in Saqifa to appoint a leader a successor to Muhammad (s) when this should be the responsibility of the entire Ummah as a whole and should involve everybody, all parties concerned and involved should have took part.
Ansar was the host, the original inhabitant of Madina, the largest & strongest "camp". A leader passed away and as in any society, they would want a new leader.Its normal Ansar wanted a leader of their own. They have never heard about hocus pocus 12 demigods, the previous leader did not tell them that A or B or C would be their new leader. Your small sect is just a crazy bunch of conspiracy theorist who are void of any ability to understand something as simple as that.

What was the sudden urge and need to gather in Saqifa on your own when the funeral processions are going on and the Muslim Ummah is in state of shock and mourning?
So everything should stop and everyone should stay at home like women who lost their husband? Why don't you ask why "the sudden urge and need to gather in state of shock and mourning" after your 20th century demigod, Khomeini died? Khamenei was selected a week before Khomeini was buried. Feeling more stupid now?

The Shaykhain were only informed of this secret gathering. And when they got to know they quietly slipped away with one named individual, why? Why weren't the others informed?
Yep, it was such a secret gathering of many people in such a known public gathering spot. Come on, keep those crazy theory coming :D

The Ansaar gathered to select their own leader because of the stance of certain reputable Muhajir who had influence and position. They (Ansaar) knew that the these Muhajir will not accept Ali and will not allow him to succeed.
OK, so the Ansar knew and did not like Abu Bakr/Umar so called plan and wanted to prevent it from happening by following Umar in choosing Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance to him. Get a recorder and replay it to yourself. Its too funny.

They saw the pattern of disobedience by not joining Osama's army, not allowing the Prophet (s) to write a will when he asked for pen and paper and caused a fuss over it. The secrecy and planning  was whispered around and got to the Ansaar.
Ansar saw various "pattern of disobedience", they wanted to prevent the conspirators from executing their plan and then Ansar helped the conspirator by selecting them. Man, your bollywood script is a comedy, not a thriller :D

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.

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. 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?."
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 10:13:40 AM
Why did only the Ansaar gather in Saqifa to appoint a leader a successor to Muhammad (s) when this should be the responsibility of the entire Ummah as a whole and should involve everybody, all parties concerned and involved should have took part.
Ansar was the host, the original inhabitant of Madina, the largest & strongest "camp". A leader passed away and as in any society, they would want a new leader.Its normal Ansar wanted a leader of their own. They have never heard about hocus pocus 12 demigods, the previous leader did not tell them that A or B or C would be their new leader. Your small sect is just a crazy bunch of conspiracy theorist who are void of any ability to understand something as simple as that.

What was the sudden urge and need to gather in Saqifa on your own when the funeral processions are going on and the Muslim Ummah is in state of shock and mourning?
So everything should stop and everyone should stay at home like women who lost their husband? Why don't you ask why "the sudden urge and need to gather in state of shock and mourning" after your 20th century demigod, Khomeini died? Khamenei was selected a week before Khomeini was buried. Feeling more stupid now?

The Shaykhain were only informed of this secret gathering. And when they got to know they quietly slipped away with one named individual, why? Why weren't the others informed?
Yep, it was such a secret gathering of many people in such a known public gathering spot. Come on, keep those crazy theory coming :D

The Ansaar gathered to select their own leader because of the stance of certain reputable Muhajir who had influence and position. They (Ansaar) knew that the these Muhajir will not accept Ali and will not allow him to succeed.
OK, so the Ansar knew and did not like Abu Bakr/Umar so called plan and wanted to prevent it from happening by following Umar in choosing Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance to him. Get a recorder and replay it to yourself. Its too funny.

They saw the pattern of disobedience by not joining Osama's army, not allowing the Prophet (s) to write a will when he asked for pen and paper and caused a fuss over it. The secrecy and planning  was whispered around and got to the Ansaar.
Ansar saw various "pattern of disobedience", they wanted to prevent the conspirators from executing their plan and then Ansar helped the conspirator by selecting them. Man, your bollywood script is a comedy, not a thriller :D

Like I said before that the gathering in Saqifa wasn't a major even or a public gathering. It wasn't conducted properly,  fairly or justly. One person came to Abu Bakr and Omar, who were sitting together while the funeral procession was going on and whispered to them. Why were the two only informed and why did only just the two of them slip away?

Why wasn't it announced and the others informed so if not all but other important personalities and figures would have gone together? This didn't happen because the outcome would have been different. You can't just ignore important questions and facts concerning Saqifa and just brush the matter aside. This needs to be discussed and looked at throughly.

Once again Abu Bakr wasn't selected or elected, firstly because it wasn't conducted justly, fairly and properly and secondly because one thing led to another and things were heating up and about to get out of hand.

The Ansaar did not want trouble and didn't want the Ummah to break out in to civil war. So the Ansaar gave in.

Look at the matter properly and openly and consider all the facts and questions that arise. Abu Bakr ended up being the leader. It was a hasty and coincidental decision.

Another important fact that when the news broke out and spread about what happened in Saqifa and the coincidental decision others also rejected and refused to give baya to Abu Bakr. What happened? Violence and threatening behaviour was used to impose this decision.

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 30, 2017, 12:51:38 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????

You are so funny. You really make me laugh. Did he? Any references?

Yes your laughing now that your 10 points have COLLAPSED lol

It's common knowledge within ahlusunna it's EASILY available online, it's not my fault if you havent done your homework or.......copy paste work😜👍

My ten points didn't collapse, you just brushed them aside. It's never your fault. The other side is always to blame. Common knowledge within Ahlesunah, pull the other one.

LOL you copy pasted from alislam.org thinking no sunni could answer lol, you've already made a fool of yourself and the 10 stupid questions, in all honesty a sunni kid could answer them and still have SHURA in his head and not no divine imamah concept.

Shows how GENUINE you are when you have to copy paste questions and then copy paste the same answer.

Your religion is in free fall..........THERE IS NO SUCH DIVINE APPOINTMENT just your assumptions and theories, just look at link and look at your source alislam.org😂😂👍👍
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 01:27:05 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????

You are so funny. You really make me laugh. Did he? Any references?

Yes your laughing now that your 10 points have COLLAPSED lol

It's common knowledge within ahlusunna it's EASILY available online, it's not my fault if you havent done your homework or.......copy paste work😜👍

My ten points didn't collapse, you just brushed them aside. It's never your fault. The other side is always to blame. Common knowledge within Ahlesunah, pull the other one.

LOL you copy pasted from alislam.org thinking no sunni could answer lol, you've already made a fool of yourself and the 10 stupid questions, in all honesty a sunni kid could answer them and still have SHURA in his head and not no divine imamah concept.

Shows how GENUINE you are when you have to copy paste questions and then copy paste the same answer.

Your religion is in free fall..........THERE IS NO SUCH DIVINE APPOINTMENT just your assumptions and theories, just look at link and look at your source alislam.org😂😂👍👍

Copy paste, link, this, that and the other,  get over it. If something or material is put forward to you at least have the decency and manners to refute it properly through discussion rather than jumping up and down and coming out with a few words just feel confident and comfortable that at least I said something.

Once again what ever the Prophet (s) gave we took. The book is divine appointment and so are those who have been put third in line in authority after the Messenger (s) by Allah.

Once again the Prophet (s) left two weighty things behind for us to hold on to and to keep together. First the book which is divinely appointed by Allah and the second the progeny who are also divinely appointed by Allah.

If you want to continue to base your belief/faith on hasty and coincidental historical incidents and events that took place and want to use them as foundation and pillars of your belief/faith then by all means continue.

But at least let me tell you this that your intentional and deliberate false and wrong campaign against us which is full of hatred and envy isn't working, didn't work and never will.

I know you have to continue with such a stance otherwise your belif/faith will instantly and automatically collapse. This is your only means of survival. People aren't daft or stupid.Let each and every individual judge for themselves and keep your judgement and verdict to yourself.

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 01:34:49 PM
Abu Bakr’s first claim – The Muhajireen being a tribe of the Quraysh were his close family.

The argument was that their relationship to the Prophet (saaws) meant that khilafat was their right. In terms of closeness there was no tribe more closely related to the Prophet (saaws) than Bani Muttalib. They were the blood descendants of the Prophet (saaws), when the verse “And warn your tribe of near kindred…” (The Qur’an 26: 214) inviting the Prophet (saaws)’s close relatives to embrace Islam. Banu Muttalib were invited not the tribes of  Abu Bakr, Hadhrath Umar or Abu Ubaydah.

Furthermore in terms of closeness no one was closer to the Prophet (saaws) than Imam Ali (as) as he was his first cousin, the Prophet (saaws) had declared him to be his brother, the husband of his daughter and the father of his grand children.

Abu Bakr seemed to suggest that the Quraysh had a right to succession, they were related to the Holy Prophet (saaws) and had hence inherited that right. Islamic Law does not stipulate inheritance for the distant relatives, it refers to the close / blood relatives. If the Quraysh were entitled to inherit on grounds of their distant relationship to the Holy Prophet (saaws) did  Ali (as) not have a greater right?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 01:38:05 PM
Don't be hesitant or afraid. By all means refute but through discussion and debate. Or at least let the people read and get to know both sides of the story/argument and let them make up their own mind.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 30, 2017, 01:58:45 PM
Here is the first evidence from the Qoran about third in line in authority after Muhammad (s);

"O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."


Where is divine appointment? Could you care to show us without going into a story or long explanation?

AUTHORITY (the only relevant word that you RELY on).......show us where is th DIVINE in that authority?........Allah swt NEVER said it in the verse you posted but your seeing things that Allah almighty never mentioned

Astaghfirullah
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 30, 2017, 02:02:36 PM
Here is the second evidence from the Qoran about third in line in authority after Muhammad (s);

"Your ally is none but Allah and [therefore] His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship]."

Ok first one you couldn't give me a DIVINE authority let's see here...... yes I believe, I bow in worship,I pay zakah and I bow, yes I am a wali a friend of Allah swt too.......Quran is simple and beautiful and easy to understand for it RELATES to us humans and not SUPERHUMAN DIVINE IMAMS.

No divine appointments
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 30, 2017, 02:05:40 PM
And who exactly are the ones who are classified as the Ulul Amre and obedience towards them has been mentioned in the Quran?

Who are the ones who Allah has mentioned as Wali alongside himself and his Messenger (s)?

These two verses are more than enough to understand and accept that Allah has put someone third in line in authority in sequence and alongside himself and his Messenger (s).

And who are they? Well lets ask Allah and see in the Qoran.

"Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet's] household, and to purify you with [extensive] purification."



No ones classified as divine authority  from the ahlubaith imams in Quran, the 2 ayahs you posted have no inkling of divine appointment inside it.

The rest is your own take on something that is not in the Quran.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 30, 2017, 02:08:09 PM
Others added their support, and Abu Bakr was made the first caliph. This choice was disputed by some of Muhammad's companions, who believed that Ali (Ali ibn Abi Talib), the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law, had already been designated as his successor by the Prophet.

No, prophet saw never designated a successor so your theory falls flat on the face.

Everyone agreed with Abu Bakr ra's leadership through shura heck even Ali ra pledged allegiance TWICE subhanallah.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 30, 2017, 02:15:08 PM
Which of you, then, will help me in this, and be my brother, mine executor and my successor amongst you?’ All remained silent, except for the youthful ʿAlī who spoke up: ‘O Prophet of God, I will be thy helper in this.’ The Prophet then placed his hand on ʿAlī’s neck and said, ‘This is my brother, mine executor and my successor amongst you. Hearken unto him and obey him.’

(Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, tr. A Guilaume, The Life of Muhammad, 118)

Oh my what desperate measures you will employ to get your divine appointment theory some credibility oh my oh my oh my......tut tut, you should really learn before barging in here thinking you have the answers 😂😂😂😂

1) your using a biography as evidence lol

2) ibn ishaq is controversial

3) In Egypt he was regarded as an authority because Yazid afterwards related Hadiths to Ibn Ishaq's authority.

Oh boy you don't follow yazid do you??

Can you feel that sinking feeling?

👍👍👍
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on September 30, 2017, 02:20:57 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????

You are so funny. You really make me laugh. Did he? Any references?

Yes your laughing now that your 10 points have COLLAPSED lol

It's common knowledge within ahlusunna it's EASILY available online, it's not my fault if you havent done your homework or.......copy paste work😜👍

My ten points didn't collapse, you just brushed them aside. It's never your fault. The other side is always to blame. Common knowledge within Ahlesunah, pull the other one.

LOL you copy pasted from alislam.org thinking no sunni could answer lol, you've already made a fool of yourself and the 10 stupid questions, in all honesty a sunni kid could answer them and still have SHURA in his head and not no divine imamah concept.

Shows how GENUINE you are when you have to copy paste questions and then copy paste the same answer.

Your religion is in free fall..........THERE IS NO SUCH DIVINE APPOINTMENT just your assumptions and theories, just look at link and look at your source alislam.org😂😂👍👍

Copy paste, link, this, that and the other,  get over it. If something or material is put forward to you at least have the decency and manners to refute it properly through discussion rather than jumping up and down and coming out with a few words just feel confident and comfortable that at least I said something.

Once again what ever the Prophet (s) gave we took. The book is divine appointment and so are those who have been put third in line in authority after the Messenger (s) by Allah.

Once again the Prophet (s) left two weighty things behind for us to hold on to and to keep together. First the book which is divinely appointed by Allah and the second the progeny who are also divinely appointed by Allah.

If you want to continue to base your belief/faith on hasty and coincidental historical incidents and events that took place and want to use them as foundation and pillars of your belief/faith then by all means continue.

But at least let me tell you this that your intentional and deliberate false and wrong campaign against us which is full of hatred and envy isn't working, didn't work and never will.

I know you have to continue with such a stance otherwise your belif/faith will instantly and automatically collapse. This is your only means of survival. People aren't daft or stupid.Let each and every individual judge for themselves and keep your judgement and verdict to yourself.




LOL your the one using yazids authority ibn ishaq as proof

That alone should sink your ship, if you had the brains to think with

Good luck in your fairytale superhuman atom moving imams they're only good for dreams and bed time stories while the Sahaba ra lived and ruled spread Islam ........as HISTORY shows, the leaders from quraish (Hadith) ruled and were SUCCESSFULL.

Subhanallah
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on September 30, 2017, 02:44:22 PM
If you define success through Satanic delusion and falsehood, then maybe yes according to your definition of success, then they were.

There are twelve verses using the word "successful", why don't you look them up.

There are verses defining Leadership, both the sense of what it means to be taken as a leader falsely (Taghut) by false eyes (the Jibt/sorcery) and what is the way to God, the road to God, the leaders to God who lead you to him, and who can navigate society from the darkness to the light.

You are saying Rasool meant by success other than what Quran said in those twelve verses? If you mean success is by those verses, prove that your Leaders who were successful in that sense, that they brought people from darkness to the light and guided them and manifested the truth.

If you are saying leaders are different than the type that Quran speaks in favor of, then bring your proof. What context shows this?

Otherwise just asserting your desire on hadiths and interpreting them and Quran by conjecture and desires, doesn't lead to truth.

Calm yourself down, fight your nafs, and begin to really have a dialogue:

1. What is the Taghut and how does the Jibt relate to it? Explain it through Quran, reasoning, and Sunnah.

2. What is true leadership and authority in light of that than?

3. How to recognize true leaders according to Quran?

4. What proofs they are provided?

5. Who were the leaders of humanity in the past? Who were the leaders in Bani-Israel?

Please think. Ma'asalma.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 09:17:08 PM
Take a look at the following questions.
mma (people) found itself in a state of utter bewilderment.

1. Did Muhammad, the Messenger of God, and the Founder of the Government of Medina, consider himself qualified to appoint his own successor or not?

2. What could be the possible, hypothetical reason(s) for Muhammad's failure to appoint his own successor?

3. Since Muhammad did not appoint his own successor, did he charge the Muslim community with the task of electing or selecting its own leader?

4. Since the Muslim community lacked guidance for the selection of a leader, did the companions of Muhammad, by their common consent, and before appointing a leader (or even after appointing a leader) prepare a set of rules or guidelines to which they adhered (subsequently)?

5. What was the attitude and the conduct of the principal companions of Muhammad toward the leadership of the Muslim community after his death?

6. What was the practice of Muhammad in regard to the selection and appointment of officers?

7. What is Quran's verdict on Muhammad's practice?

8. What did Muhammad actually do about his succession?

9. What actually happened after the death of Muhammad?

10. What importance does the question of succession have in history in general?

Give it a go!

I will try........

1) He Prophet saw COULD have IF there was a call from Allah swt to do so to appoint a divine leader but there is NO clear evidence from Quran and sunnah, but there is clear evidence of CONSULTATION!!!

2) He Noble Prophet saw NEVER failed nauzobillah for He saw NEVER mentioned such or did anything to appoint anyone, He saw always CONSULTED with companions. No secrets.
(Astaghfirullah you should NEVER look at the Prophet saw as a failure nor you should attempt to portray likewise just to win an argument)

3) Yes CONSULT

4) They voted according to shura consultation which is explained in Quran as well

5) Brilliant Islam expanded and grew under the conduct of the principle companions who were chosen by consultation

6) Prophet saw as a leader didn't need to call a council or shura to appoint officers, even though He saw did ask other companions when appointing, He saw never appointed for succession, positions yes succession no, unless a divine revelation came then it was an order from above,but it never did. It's the job of a leader to appoint his officer and consult in the process.

7) It's on par with message of Nabi Mohammed saw to the T.......but no mention of following a divine successor from Quran or sunnah tho.

8) He Nabi saw NEVER appointed, He saw did CONSULT with companions, no such thing as succession through family blood lines in Islam.

9) It's clear what happened at saqifa.......They followed the Quran and Sunna and chose a leader through......SHURA CONSULTATION according to the Quran and sunnah of Nabi Mohammed saw.

10) No importance of divine succession for it's a fairytale made up unless you have clear evidence from the Quran.
As for succession in leadership then it was important and the principal companions ra showed their leadership credentials in their Imamate over the umma at their respective times and no Muslim was against their rule unless you was a hater of the sunnah.

Just one question for the moment,
Shura, consultation? In Saqifa they followed the Qoran and Sunnah and chose through consultation, shura? Ok, why wasn't the same method used to choose the second Khalifa.

Where did shura, consultation go during the second Khalifa? Why wasn't Qoran and Sunah followed the second time around? And lastly why did Abu Bakr appoint his successor? What excuse are we going to bring up here?

Are they your thought up questions? Or is it copy pasted?

you really are clutching on straws man😊

Abu Bakr siddeeq ra consulted amongst the 6 Sahaba ra individually before selecting Umar Farukh ra.

Shura consultation = Quran and sunnah

Divine appointment = ?????/?????

You are so funny. You really make me laugh. Did he? Any references?

Yes your laughing now that your 10 points have COLLAPSED lol

It's common knowledge within ahlusunna it's EASILY available online, it's not my fault if you havent done your homework or.......copy paste work😜👍

My ten points didn't collapse, you just brushed them aside. It's never your fault. The other side is always to blame. Common knowledge within Ahlesunah, pull the other one.

LOL you copy pasted from alislam.org thinking no sunni could answer lol, you've already made a fool of yourself and the 10 stupid questions, in all honesty a sunni kid could answer them and still have SHURA in his head and not no divine imamah concept.

Shows how GENUINE you are when you have to copy paste questions and then copy paste the same answer.

Your religion is in free fall..........THERE IS NO SUCH DIVINE APPOINTMENT just your assumptions and theories, just look at link and look at your source alislam.org😂😂👍👍

Copy paste, link, this, that and the other,  get over it. If something or material is put forward to you at least have the decency and manners to refute it properly through discussion rather than jumping up and down and coming out with a few words just feel confident and comfortable that at least I said something.

Once again what ever the Prophet (s) gave we took. The book is divine appointment and so are those who have been put third in line in authority after the Messenger (s) by Allah.

Once again the Prophet (s) left two weighty things behind for us to hold on to and to keep together. First the book which is divinely appointed by Allah and the second the progeny who are also divinely appointed by Allah.

If you want to continue to base your belief/faith on hasty and coincidental historical incidents and events that took place and want to use them as foundation and pillars of your belief/faith then by all means continue.

But at least let me tell you this that your intentional and deliberate false and wrong campaign against us which is full of hatred and envy isn't working, didn't work and never will.

I know you have to continue with such a stance otherwise your belif/faith will instantly and automatically collapse. This is your only means of survival. People aren't daft or stupid.Let each and every individual judge for themselves and keep your judgement and verdict to yourself.




LOL your the one using yazids authority ibn ishaq as proof

That alone should sink your ship, if you had the brains to think with

Good luck in your fairytale superhuman atom moving imams they're only good for dreams and bed time stories while the Sahaba ra lived and ruled spread Islam ........as HISTORY shows, the leaders from quraish (Hadith) ruled and were SUCCESSFULL.

Subhanallah

LOL! This is exactly what your problem is and has been that you don't look at what is or has been said but you look at who is saying or has said it. You clearly are involved in personality worship.

The Sahaba, yes of course they had major differences between them which led to bloodshed and murder. They had hatred for one another and cursed each other. Moawiya made it compulsory in Jumma Khutba to curse Ali and show hatred towards him.Oh there's plenty in history what the Sahaba got up to.

I asked you to explain to me the verse of purification (Tat'heer) and what it means in your own words and according to your belief but you are either too hesitant or afraid to engage in a positive and constructive discussion. You come out with a child like manner and with kindergarten talk.

Consultation (shura), this also brought about Yazeed. He was the sixth Khalifa of the Muslims and the ruler of the Muslim empire. Vast majority accepted him one way or the other but they did accept him. So did many noble companions and their offspring and high ranking personalities.

This is what Saqifa brought about and what you believe in. Who ever and how ever gets into power and gains authority you accept him. If they turn out good then wow. But if they turn out bad then lets not blame the system that we believe in but the person.

We believe in those who Allah removed rijs from and whom Allah purified. And why did Allah do that? What was the need? So they could govern us and Qoran and Sunah were left in the hands and caretakers who were divine and purified. And those are the ones we believe in and take Shariyath from. You continue with what ever you have. What we have is better than yours and makes sense and is logical.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on September 30, 2017, 10:29:28 PM
Shura (Arabic: شورى‎‎ shūrā) is an Arabic word for "consultation". The Quran and the Prophet Muhammad encourage Muslims to decide their affairs in consultation with those who will be affected by that decision.

All those who would be or were effected by the decision were they in Saqifa and did all parties effected take part in this gathering and decision making? The answer is NO! Then what kind of consultation was this?

Did the Shaikhayn take part on behalf of others? Were the Shaikhayn given authority to act on behalf of others or who gave them the authority to decide on behalf of others?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Abu Muhammad on October 01, 2017, 12:47:58 AM
Shura (Arabic: شورى‎‎ shūrā) is an Arabic word for "consultation". The Quran and the Prophet Muhammad encourage Muslims to decide their affairs in consultation with those who will be affected by that decision.

All those who would be or were effected by the decision were they in Saqifa and did all parties effected take part in this gathering and decision making? The answer is NO! Then what kind of consultation was this?

Did the Shaikhayn take part on behalf of others? Were the Shaikhayn given authority to act on behalf of others or who gave them the authority to decide on behalf of others?

@iceman

Who were the one who actually triggered the issue of the selection of caliph after the death of Rasulullah (saw)? Abu Bakr & Umar or a group of Ansar?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on October 01, 2017, 12:54:18 AM
Shura (Arabic: شورى‎‎ shūrā) is an Arabic word for "consultation". The Quran and the Prophet Muhammad encourage Muslims to decide their affairs in consultation with those who will be affected by that decision.





Why would the Quran & the prophet (saw) encourage the muslims to decide their affairs in consultation if there is an infallible Imam as the guide?

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on October 01, 2017, 01:40:00 AM
Counseling doesn't mean deciding from their own opinion.  It means they come together to understand Quran and Sunnah or the words of Ahlulbayt.

It means they discuss with one another the religion, which was done during Rasool time to. That they help one another reflect over Quran and Sunnah.

Ahlulbayt teach humanity, but they need humans to come together and discuss their narrations, and it was also obligatory to refer all ahadith to the Quran.  If something contradicts Quran, they would have to counsel one another about it.

The Prophet would counsel them regarding his decisions so they understand why he is doing what he is doing as other verses show that if he would obey them in many things, destruction would of have befell the believers.

The verse could of said "And they decide through counsel to one another", but the religion of God is not about deciding, it's about counseling one another about God's counsel as well his Messenger's counsel to humanity.



Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 01, 2017, 05:14:54 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
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Farid on October 01, 2017, 10:43:17 AM
Omg... this thread just started and this many posts already?!

(https://media.giphy.com/media/fDO2Nk0ImzvvW/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: zaid_ibn_ali on October 01, 2017, 12:44:54 PM
Counseling doesn't mean deciding from their own opinion.  It means they come together to understand Quran and Sunnah or the words of Ahlulbayt.

It means they discuss with one another the religion, which was done during Rasool time to. That they help one another reflect over Quran and Sunnah.

Ahlulbayt teach humanity, but they need humans to come together and discuss their narrations, and it was also obligatory to refer all ahadith to the Quran.  If something contradicts Quran, they would have to counsel one another about it.

The Prophet would counsel them regarding his decisions so they understand why he is doing what he is doing as other verses show that if he would obey them in many things, destruction would of have befell the believers.

The verse could of said "And they decide through counsel to one another", but the religion of God is not about deciding, it's about counseling one another about God's counsel as well his Messenger's counsel to humanity.

Ah is this another one of your "hadith needed to be written down" despite their being a living infallible Imam as the guide & another 11 to follow him.

The truth is even shia acknowledge consulatation did happen, hadiths were written down etc in the times of the Imams, obviously the ummah never recognised them as being the supreme infallible guide of the age.

Shia have to try & reconcile history with their fantasy ideology with distasterous results.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on October 01, 2017, 05:51:40 PM
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?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on October 01, 2017, 06:51:25 PM
Ah is this another one of your "hadith needed to be written down" despite their being a living infallible Imam as the guide & another 11 to follow him.

The truth is even shia acknowledge consulatation did happen, hadiths were written down etc in the times of the Imams, obviously the ummah never recognised them as being the supreme infallible guide of the age.

Shia have to try & reconcile history with their fantasy ideology with distasterous results.

Salam

Shura between themselves was a part of the life of the companions during the time of Mohammad as well. 

It's foremost about understanding the counsel of the Prophet towards them, and making sure everyone on point. During Imam times, it's not only about understanding what Imams teach, but discerning what is attributed to them is true.

The Quran says "therefore if you dispute in a thing refer it to God and the Messenger", everyone says yes we refer to Quran and Sunnah, we still disputing and differring. The command is not "attempt by whatever you means you want to God and the Messenger", it actually means we ought to make sure to refer our dispute to God and the Messenger and make Rasool an arbitrator by which our disputes are settled.

The collections from Rasool, from Ali, etc, they all have to be on point.

The Quran no one just understands it on first go, it needs to be continuously discussed by society. The ahadith of Imams are the primary way to understand it, but a lot can be attributed to Imams from Iblis forces.

So without believers counseling one another,  they will not gain the insights they have, not fix the errors they are on, and will not refer things back to Quran and Sunnah.

And reflecting and taking counsel from one another is a priority.  We all been put here for a purpose.

But the fact is we go to Quran and Sunnah not to settle our disputes, but to argue for an idol among idols and jusity our delusions.

We are far removed from sincerity to God and the Messenger,  we use Leaders that God appointed as a way to obey leaders God has not appointed even the latter leaders teach things contradictory to God's book.

When people ask, what are we suppose to do if not Taqleed, this verse shows, it shows our affair should be counsel to one another.

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on October 02, 2017, 09:13:52 AM
Ice man

Personality worship??? The personalities whom I follow........do they move atoms?? Do they help when I call their names??
 "Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help." Quran[1:5]"
Do I alter Quran meanings to accommodate alien ideas about superimams?? Do I hang pictures of any personality of Sahaba ra????

You really need to look at yourself and your below average arguments, honestly it's kindergarten stuff.

Again......assumptions and lies......assumptions and lies again and again and again, please TRY to bring forth real evidences and not just some Tyre head made up fairytales so as he can get his khums paid.

you have nothing on the Sahaba ra just stories they never hated or killed each other especially the first khulafa ra, as for Ameer muawiya ra lol honestly you have NOTHING, He muawiya ra NEVER cursed Ali ra, it's just the same way your tyre heads teach you to twist AUTHORITY in Quran to DIVINE AUTHORITY, and now look at how stupid you really look cos there is no DIVINITY to appointing the superimams.......like I said you're stuck in a rut and your sinking so now you will use unauthentic reports as proof for your next Shiite move......discredit the Sahaba ra, talk about desperate measures lol

My friend even a kindergarten kid will explain to you the same as an adult that........there is NO DIVINE APPOINTMENT........unless you make it up in your head, your stuck, how hard can it be to point out DIVINE APPOINTMENT in Quran, it's an EASY book to read and understand as a Muslim but why oh why do you have to into semantics just to explain that verse?? You have NOTHING!

What a CRANK no honestly I mean it, your age shows in this paragraph bout yazeed being selected by shura???.........go back and READ genuine history and don't listen to pulpit monkey talk honestly it's good advice, nothing else to add here coz it's your crazy mad assumptions and hate again.

Again assumptions theories ANYTHING to attack from ANY angle even if it means lies lol
It doesn't matter what you think it's based on hearsay and lies.......and you still believe it, lol.

Ours does make sense here I will break it down for a childish mind like yourself coz you don't seem to wanna open your eyes to the truth

Sahaba ra were successful in implementing Islam and spreading it throughout the world they are WELL RENOWNED to Muslims as well as non Muslims the history is there ( the 12 leaders Hadith), we Muslims don't need to twist quranic meanings or use unauthentic information to come to our conclusions about Sahaba ra why because Allah swt is well pleased with them (Quran) verse 9/100 (CLEAR) as well as many Hadith from Prophet saw all clear, they adopted shura from following Prophet saw as well as the noble Quran, it was the prophetic way for Prophet saw NEVER APPOINTED nor did Allah swt.

As for imams ra they never ruled but a few and we're never successful (goes against the 12 leader Hadith coz they weren't successful as the Hadith states), now to add weight to your DIVINE APPOINTMENT theory you are TWISTING "authority" in Quran to mean DIVINE adding meanings to words in Quran to adopt the of Shiite way of thinking that imams are divine, here is the ayah and the readers can see and find the divinity of imams there..............
........"O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."

Without semantics anyone???

Conclusion

Shura = mentioned in Quran implemented and used by Prophet saw and His followers ra

Divine imam/appointment = Nothing in Quran and sunnah and was never heard of unless you read unauthentic history books

You really need to move on, Shiite arguments for divinity imams is old and you have nothing but heresay, look at your posts not even 1 where you can explain a verse as it says what it says unless you go in deep explanation and semantics.

I caught you using other websites questions to answer here as if we couldn't or you would catch us out......very kiddish......and now LOOK you are stuck trying to defend that same alien concept you tried to catch us out on them stupid 10 questions.........we Muslims see you coming 😊

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on October 02, 2017, 09:44:14 AM
If you define success through Satanic delusion and falsehood, then maybe yes according to your definition of success, then they were.

There are twelve verses using the word "successful", why don't you look them up.

There are verses defining Leadership, both the sense of what it means to be taken as a leader falsely (Taghut) by false eyes (the Jibt/sorcery) and what is the way to God, the road to God, the leaders to God who lead you to him, and who can navigate society from the darkness to the light.

You are saying Rasool meant by success other than what Quran said in those twelve verses? If you mean success is by those verses, prove that your Leaders who were successful in that sense, that they brought people from darkness to the light and guided them and manifested the truth.

If you are saying leaders are different than the type that Quran speaks in favor of, then bring your proof. What context shows this?

Otherwise just asserting your desire on hadiths and interpreting them and Quran by conjecture and desires, doesn't lead to truth.

Calm yourself down, fight your nafs, and begin to really have a dialogue:

1. What is the Taghut and how does the Jibt relate to it? Explain it through Quran, reasoning, and Sunnah.

2. What is true leadership and authority in light of that than?

3. How to recognize true leaders according to Quran?

4. What proofs they are provided?

5. Who were the leaders of humanity in the past? Who were the leaders in Bani-Israel?

Please think. Ma'asalma.

Yes THINK without the influence of the devil!!!

Yes they was successful in ISLAM, we have the 12 leader Hadith.......it says for the prophecy to true the leaders had to be successful in their rule.....which if you read GENUINE history and not books from pulpit taghuts maybe you will understand and maybe the devil move on from effecting your brain ........it's called following the TRUTH, good luck.

See the devil twisting your head?? The leaders weren't PROPHETS lol GUIDES yes they did guide the non Muslims and reverted them back to Islam yes they bought the light of Quran and sunnah to the world.......look at the population of Muslims now!!! Thanks to the leadership and rule of the Sahaba ra👍👍

Huh?? Lol it's YOU SHIITES who believe in a different leadership ( of the divine kind), your pal iceman still hasn't found the divinity in leadership, he is twisting quranic ayahs and yet you want me to explain leadership lol

I am calm to the TRUTHFUL and not with the devils like you who keep lying and insulting the followers of prophet saw, that's all.

1) taghut is that devil inside you forcing you into beliefs that are unnatural

2) true meaning is the devil is feeding you lies

3) because of that devil you are now believing in supernatural imams and atom movers

4) devils whispering in your head

5) your leader in the past was iblis hence your the taghut

Your a joke but I tell you what, that devils making a right path for you to follow taghut.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on October 02, 2017, 12:59:55 PM
Ice man

Personality worship??? The personalities whom I follow........do they move atoms?? Do they help when I call their names??
 "Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help." Quran[1:5]"
Do I alter Quran meanings to accommodate alien ideas about superimams?? Do I hang pictures of any personality of Sahaba ra????

You really need to look at yourself and your below average arguments, honestly it's kindergarten stuff.

Again......assumptions and lies......assumptions and lies again and again and again, please TRY to bring forth real evidences and not just some Tyre head made up fairytales so as he can get his khums paid.

you have nothing on the Sahaba ra just stories they never hated or killed each other especially the first khulafa ra, as for Ameer muawiya ra lol honestly you have NOTHING, He muawiya ra NEVER cursed Ali ra, it's just the same way your tyre heads teach you to twist AUTHORITY in Quran to DIVINE AUTHORITY, and now look at how stupid you really look cos there is no DIVINITY to appointing the superimams.......like I said you're stuck in a rut and your sinking so now you will use unauthentic reports as proof for your next Shiite move......discredit the Sahaba ra, talk about desperate measures lol

My friend even a kindergarten kid will explain to you the same as an adult that........there is NO DIVINE APPOINTMENT........unless you make it up in your head, your stuck, how hard can it be to point out DIVINE APPOINTMENT in Quran, it's an EASY book to read and understand as a Muslim but why oh why do you have to into semantics just to explain that verse?? You have NOTHING!

What a CRANK no honestly I mean it, your age shows in this paragraph bout yazeed being selected by shura???.........go back and READ genuine history and don't listen to pulpit monkey talk honestly it's good advice, nothing else to add here coz it's your crazy mad assumptions and hate again.

Again assumptions theories ANYTHING to attack from ANY angle even if it means lies lol
It doesn't matter what you think it's based on hearsay and lies.......and you still believe it, lol.

Ours does make sense here I will break it down for a childish mind like yourself coz you don't seem to wanna open your eyes to the truth

Sahaba ra were successful in implementing Islam and spreading it throughout the world they are WELL RENOWNED to Muslims as well as non Muslims the history is there ( the 12 leaders Hadith), we Muslims don't need to twist quranic meanings or use unauthentic information to come to our conclusions about Sahaba ra why because Allah swt is well pleased with them (Quran) verse 9/100 (CLEAR) as well as many Hadith from Prophet saw all clear, they adopted shura from following Prophet saw as well as the noble Quran, it was the prophetic way for Prophet saw NEVER APPOINTED nor did Allah swt.

As for imams ra they never ruled but a few and we're never successful (goes against the 12 leader Hadith coz they weren't successful as the Hadith states), now to add weight to your DIVINE APPOINTMENT theory you are TWISTING "authority" in Quran to mean DIVINE adding meanings to words in Quran to adopt the of Shiite way of thinking that imams are divine, here is the ayah and the readers can see and find the divinity of imams there..............
........"O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."

Without semantics anyone???

Conclusion

Shura = mentioned in Quran implemented and used by Prophet saw and His followers ra

Divine imam/appointment = Nothing in Quran and sunnah and was never heard of unless you read unauthentic history books

You really need to move on, Shiite arguments for divinity imams is old and you have nothing but heresay, look at your posts not even 1 where you can explain a verse as it says what it says unless you go in deep explanation and semantics.

I caught you using other websites questions to answer here as if we couldn't or you would catch us out......very kiddish......and now LOOK you are stuck trying to defend that same alien concept you tried to catch us out on them stupid 10 questions.........we Muslims see you coming 😊

LOL and LOL again. You really don't have a clue about Islamic history, do you. If there is no divine appointment after Muhammad (s) and if he didn't bother to appoint anyone to succeed him then for heaven's sake discuss and debate it in a civilised manner and with an open mind. Don't let off a tantrum about it. Seriously take a look at your posts especially the latest one. You are so childish. Honestly you really are.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on October 02, 2017, 03:25:32 PM
Ice man

Personality worship??? The personalities whom I follow........do they move atoms?? Do they help when I call their names??
 "Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help." Quran[1:5]"
Do I alter Quran meanings to accommodate alien ideas about superimams?? Do I hang pictures of any personality of Sahaba ra????

You really need to look at yourself and your below average arguments, honestly it's kindergarten stuff.

Again......assumptions and lies......assumptions and lies again and again and again, please TRY to bring forth real evidences and not just some Tyre head made up fairytales so as he can get his khums paid.

you have nothing on the Sahaba ra just stories they never hated or killed each other especially the first khulafa ra, as for Ameer muawiya ra lol honestly you have NOTHING, He muawiya ra NEVER cursed Ali ra, it's just the same way your tyre heads teach you to twist AUTHORITY in Quran to DIVINE AUTHORITY, and now look at how stupid you really look cos there is no DIVINITY to appointing the superimams.......like I said you're stuck in a rut and your sinking so now you will use unauthentic reports as proof for your next Shiite move......discredit the Sahaba ra, talk about desperate measures lol

My friend even a kindergarten kid will explain to you the same as an adult that........there is NO DIVINE APPOINTMENT........unless you make it up in your head, your stuck, how hard can it be to point out DIVINE APPOINTMENT in Quran, it's an EASY book to read and understand as a Muslim but why oh why do you have to into semantics just to explain that verse?? You have NOTHING!

What a CRANK no honestly I mean it, your age shows in this paragraph bout yazeed being selected by shura???.........go back and READ genuine history and don't listen to pulpit monkey talk honestly it's good advice, nothing else to add here coz it's your crazy mad assumptions and hate again.

Again assumptions theories ANYTHING to attack from ANY angle even if it means lies lol
It doesn't matter what you think it's based on hearsay and lies.......and you still believe it, lol.

Ours does make sense here I will break it down for a childish mind like yourself coz you don't seem to wanna open your eyes to the truth

Sahaba ra were successful in implementing Islam and spreading it throughout the world they are WELL RENOWNED to Muslims as well as non Muslims the history is there ( the 12 leaders Hadith), we Muslims don't need to twist quranic meanings or use unauthentic information to come to our conclusions about Sahaba ra why because Allah swt is well pleased with them (Quran) verse 9/100 (CLEAR) as well as many Hadith from Prophet saw all clear, they adopted shura from following Prophet saw as well as the noble Quran, it was the prophetic way for Prophet saw NEVER APPOINTED nor did Allah swt.

As for imams ra they never ruled but a few and we're never successful (goes against the 12 leader Hadith coz they weren't successful as the Hadith states), now to add weight to your DIVINE APPOINTMENT theory you are TWISTING "authority" in Quran to mean DIVINE adding meanings to words in Quran to adopt the of Shiite way of thinking that imams are divine, here is the ayah and the readers can see and find the divinity of imams there..............
........"O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."

Without semantics anyone???

Conclusion

Shura = mentioned in Quran implemented and used by Prophet saw and His followers ra

Divine imam/appointment = Nothing in Quran and sunnah and was never heard of unless you read unauthentic history books

You really need to move on, Shiite arguments for divinity imams is old and you have nothing but heresay, look at your posts not even 1 where you can explain a verse as it says what it says unless you go in deep explanation and semantics.

I caught you using other websites questions to answer here as if we couldn't or you would catch us out......very kiddish......and now LOOK you are stuck trying to defend that same alien concept you tried to catch us out on them stupid 10 questions.........we Muslims see you coming 😊

LOL and LOL again. You really don't have a clue about Islamic history, do you. If there is no divine appointment after Muhammad (s) and if he didn't bother to appoint anyone to succeed him then for heaven's sake discuss and debate it in a civilised manner and with an open mind. Don't let off a tantrum about it. Seriously take a look at your posts especially the latest one. You are so childish. Honestly you really are.


And you do?? Don't crease me up with your stupidity honestly that's the road you are on.

I gave you Quran and sunnah on shura

You gave me zilch on Quran and sunna on divine appointments (apart from your thought of authority means divine authority)

This is why I say your childish and you have nothing on divine imamah I even answered your stupid 10 questions and they really were stupid if you was trying to portray divine appointment through it

My last post was for you kids to understand ......1.6 billion Muslims get it but you and a about 100 mill of you don't and that's not my fault

1400 years and the search hasn't ended.......no divine appointments from Quran or hidden divine beings either and you call us childish for proving you wrong???? 😂
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on October 02, 2017, 03:56:27 PM
Ice man

Personality worship??? The personalities whom I follow........do they move atoms?? Do they help when I call their names??
 "Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help." Quran[1:5]"
Do I alter Quran meanings to accommodate alien ideas about superimams?? Do I hang pictures of any personality of Sahaba ra????

You really need to look at yourself and your below average arguments, honestly it's kindergarten stuff.

Again......assumptions and lies......assumptions and lies again and again and again, please TRY to bring forth real evidences and not just some Tyre head made up fairytales so as he can get his khums paid.

you have nothing on the Sahaba ra just stories they never hated or killed each other especially the first khulafa ra, as for Ameer muawiya ra lol honestly you have NOTHING, He muawiya ra NEVER cursed Ali ra, it's just the same way your tyre heads teach you to twist AUTHORITY in Quran to DIVINE AUTHORITY, and now look at how stupid you really look cos there is no DIVINITY to appointing the superimams.......like I said you're stuck in a rut and your sinking so now you will use unauthentic reports as proof for your next Shiite move......discredit the Sahaba ra, talk about desperate measures lol

My friend even a kindergarten kid will explain to you the same as an adult that........there is NO DIVINE APPOINTMENT........unless you make it up in your head, your stuck, how hard can it be to point out DIVINE APPOINTMENT in Quran, it's an EASY book to read and understand as a Muslim but why oh why do you have to into semantics just to explain that verse?? You have NOTHING!

What a CRANK no honestly I mean it, your age shows in this paragraph bout yazeed being selected by shura???.........go back and READ genuine history and don't listen to pulpit monkey talk honestly it's good advice, nothing else to add here coz it's your crazy mad assumptions and hate again.

Again assumptions theories ANYTHING to attack from ANY angle even if it means lies lol
It doesn't matter what you think it's based on hearsay and lies.......and you still believe it, lol.

Ours does make sense here I will break it down for a childish mind like yourself coz you don't seem to wanna open your eyes to the truth

Sahaba ra were successful in implementing Islam and spreading it throughout the world they are WELL RENOWNED to Muslims as well as non Muslims the history is there ( the 12 leaders Hadith), we Muslims don't need to twist quranic meanings or use unauthentic information to come to our conclusions about Sahaba ra why because Allah swt is well pleased with them (Quran) verse 9/100 (CLEAR) as well as many Hadith from Prophet saw all clear, they adopted shura from following Prophet saw as well as the noble Quran, it was the prophetic way for Prophet saw NEVER APPOINTED nor did Allah swt.

As for imams ra they never ruled but a few and we're never successful (goes against the 12 leader Hadith coz they weren't successful as the Hadith states), now to add weight to your DIVINE APPOINTMENT theory you are TWISTING "authority" in Quran to mean DIVINE adding meanings to words in Quran to adopt the of Shiite way of thinking that imams are divine, here is the ayah and the readers can see and find the divinity of imams there..............
........"O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result."

Without semantics anyone???

Conclusion

Shura = mentioned in Quran implemented and used by Prophet saw and His followers ra

Divine imam/appointment = Nothing in Quran and sunnah and was never heard of unless you read unauthentic history books

You really need to move on, Shiite arguments for divinity imams is old and you have nothing but heresay, look at your posts not even 1 where you can explain a verse as it says what it says unless you go in deep explanation and semantics.

I caught you using other websites questions to answer here as if we couldn't or you would catch us out......very kiddish......and now LOOK you are stuck trying to defend that same alien concept you tried to catch us out on them stupid 10 questions.........we Muslims see you coming 😊

LOL and LOL again. You really don't have a clue about Islamic history, do you. If there is no divine appointment after Muhammad (s) and if he didn't bother to appoint anyone to succeed him then for heaven's sake discuss and debate it in a civilised manner and with an open mind. Don't let off a tantrum about it. Seriously take a look at your posts especially the latest one. You are so childish. Honestly you really are.


And you do?? Don't crease me up with your stupidity honestly that's the road you are on.

I gave you Quran and sunnah on shura

You gave me zilch on Quran and sunna on divine appointments (apart from your thought of authority means divine authority)

This is why I say your childish and you have nothing on divine imamah I even answered your stupid 10 questions and they really were stupid if you was trying to portray divine appointment through it

My last post was for you kids to understand ......1.6 billion Muslims get it but you and a about 100 mill of you don't and that's not my fault

1400 years and the search hasn't ended.......no divine appointments from Quran or hidden divine beings either and you call us childish for proving you wrong???? 😂

I already asked you about your version of Ayat e Tat'heer and its explanation but nothing from you on that. No intellectual discussion from you. Don't worry about the figures because vast majority are hellbound anyway.

Once again why didn't Abu Bakr follow Qoran and Sunah? He chose his successor. And what about Moawiya and Yazeed the fifth and sixth Khalif of the Muslims, where they brought about through Shura?

If yes then stick to them and if no then there is definitely something wrong with the ridiculous system you believe. Grow up and start discussing, answering and explaining rather than letting off tantrums.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on October 02, 2017, 05:44:01 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...........
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on October 02, 2017, 06:14:09 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 02, 2017, 10:17:37 PM
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 😂
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Abu Muhammad on October 02, 2017, 10:25:43 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on October 03, 2017, 03:42:54 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on October 03, 2017, 04:51:23 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: iceman on October 03, 2017, 08:09:47 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Farid on October 03, 2017, 11:15:28 PM
@ 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/

Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on October 04, 2017, 07:41:28 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: wannabe on October 05, 2017, 04:29:10 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?
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 05, 2017, 10:29:53 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
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: wannabe on October 05, 2017, 11:41:38 PM
one shouldn't forget that victor writes history. just saying.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Mythbuster1 on October 06, 2017, 12:47:59 PM
one shouldn't forget that stories  of divine human beings and atom movers are not Islamic history.
Just saying.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 07, 2017, 12:05:15 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
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: wannabe on October 07, 2017, 02:08:58 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Abu Muhammad on October 07, 2017, 04:41:12 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 08, 2017, 04:46:06 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 08, 2017, 04:47:51 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 😁
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on October 08, 2017, 05:09:31 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."
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 08, 2017, 05:12:04 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? 😁
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Link on October 08, 2017, 05:21:53 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.
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: Hadrami on October 08, 2017, 05:37:15 AM
i dont know why i reply to a mentally ill person, but anyway Quran muslim have today has reached us from those "misguided" sahaba. Try finding  your hidden quran, dont use ours 😁
Title: Re: Saqifa - ATT: Iceman
Post by: wannabe on October 08, 2017, 03:13:24 PM
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.
hehehe...this is what u wrote:
Quote
....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.
i've quoted from kitab-ul-saqifah.....
anyway, the word from hazrat umar himself is enuf evidence for me: it's not a sunnah from kulafa ar-rasyidin, to be repeated/followed. but of course, no two persons have the same level of comprehension skills. maybe u r rite. Allah will let us know in what we differed.