TwelverShia.net Forum

Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ridhwan

Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« on: January 15, 2019, 10:09:14 PM »
I like to know of all the Sahaaba (may Allah be pleased with all of them) whom the Shi'a do not label as either munaafiq, kaafir, or faasiq.

I heard that there are only a few (like around 7).

Who are they and why?

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 255
  • +11/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2019, 05:45:22 PM »
Salmaan, Abu Dhar, Miqdaad.

Ammar bin Yasir initially went astray but later 'returned' to Ali according to their fairy tales.

They only like them because they were on the side of Ali during the political tensions. They never saw Ali as some divinely appointed infallible Imam - this concept was alien to them. Ironically, both Salmaan and Ammar were close people to Abubakr and Omar during their Caliphates.  They both acted as their governors and military generals.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2019, 05:46:25 PM by MuslimK »
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

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

iceman

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2019, 10:40:22 PM »
Salmaan, Abu Dhar, Miqdaad.

Ammar bin Yasir initially went astray but later 'returned' to Ali according to their fairy tales.

They only like them because they were on the side of Ali during the political tensions. They never saw Ali as some divinely appointed infallible Imam - this concept was alien to them. Ironically, both Salmaan and Ammar were close people to Abubakr and Omar during their Caliphates.  They both acted as their governors and military generals.

Well if they were on the side Ali then that means they were on the side of the Caliphatul Muslimeen and the Islamic Caliphate.

"Ironically, both Salmaan and Ammar were close people to Abubakr and Omar during their Caliphates"

And ironically both were close to Ali during his Caliphate. At least they were loyal to their Caliphs and the Caliphate. Where as some of you start doubting and becoming weak at your knees concerning the 4th.

whoaretheshia

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2019, 01:02:02 AM »
There is this myth that Shia Mulims only approve of a few companions, and malign the rest. The reality is, we view the companions as we do any other large body or group, including companions of previous Prophets of God. In the noble Quran, there is a clear precedent whereby there are groups that are loyal, groups that go astray , groups that are ignorant.

Given the definition of a companion as per Sunni terminology is anyone who had seen, heard or met the Prophet once, the number of technical companions is well over 100,000. Shias generally refrain from making judgement of the majority of these, who were caught up in the confusion and chaos. Is that not what we see today? Powerful people at the top on all sides make decisions and large swathes of the population unfortunately have little power and submit or are swayed?

What we reject however, is the rather uncritical and irrational belief that anyone who saw and heard the Prophet is beyond reproach, condemnation and question, and that we assume only good about them and they are destined paradise if they outwardly die on Islam. We consider this divorced from a realistic view of the companions, and is based on idealism bereft of any good evidence.

However, when it comes to prominent companions, such as notable members of the Muhajiroon and Ansaar, we actually approve of a good number.

Here is a short list, but there are many others:


Abu Dharr
Ammar bin Yassir
Abu Rafi
Ali ibn  Abi Rafi
Abdullah ibn Mas’ud
Abdullah ibn Abbas
Abu Talib
Abu Dujana al ansari
Abu Sai’d Al Khudri
Miqdad Al Aswad
Uthman ibn Madhu’n
Salman Al Farsi
Uthman Ibn Hunayf
Sahl Ibn Hunayf
Umar ibn Abi Salama
Hazrat Hamzah
Hazrat Bilal
 Jabir ibn Abdillah Al Ansari
Abu Ayyub Al Ansar
 Hujr ibn Adi
Muhammed ibn Abi Bakr
Yasir ibn Amir [First Matyrs]
 Sumayyah Bint Khayyat [First Matyrs]
Zaid ibn Harith
Usama ibn Zaid
Jaffar ibn Abi Talib [At tayyar]
Aqeel Ibn Abi Talib
Khuzaymah ibn Thabit
Habib ibn Madhair
Sai’d Rabi.
 Khadija bint Khuwalid
Ali ibn Abi Talib
Fatim Binte Muhammed
Hasan ibn Ali
Hussain Ibn Ali
Abbas [uncle]
Umm Salama
Umm Sauda
Umm Zainab
Al Harith ibn Abi Hala
Umm Ayman
Umar ibn Muqrin
Qays ibn Sa’d
Malik ibn Nuwayrah
Kumayl ibn Ziyad
Sa’sa’ ibn Suhan
Fatima bite Assad
Ubay ibn K’ab
Aban B.Sai’d
Abu Barza Al-Aslami
Abul Haytham b. Al Tayyihan
Abu Tufayl
Abu Qutada Al Ansari
Al Bara b.Azib
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2019, 01:04:32 AM »
As for any traditions about everyone apostatizing save a handful, if you are sincere in seeking the truth and the actual position, i highly recommend reading this article:

"Did the Sahaba become Kufaar?": https://www.shiachat.com/forum/blogs/entry/233-did-the-sahaba-become-kafir/

It does a thorough job for anyone who believes discussions should be based on fair, objective standards and not merely desires.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2019, 10:04:15 AM »
Given the definition of a companion as per Sunni terminology is anyone who had seen, heard or met the Prophet once, the number of technical companions is well over 100,000.   
An important clause in the definition which you missed is that, "He should die in state of Emaan", and this clause is even present in the Shia definition.


However, when it comes to prominent companions, such as notable members of the Muhajiroon and Ansaar, we actually approve of a good number.

Here is a short list, but there are many others:


Abu Dharr
Ammar bin Yassir
Abu Rafi
Ali ibn  Abi Rafi
Abdullah ibn Mas’ud
Abdullah ibn Abbas
Abu Talib
Abu Dujana al ansari
Abu Sai’d Al Khudri
Miqdad Al Aswad
Uthman ibn Madhu’n
Salman Al Farsi
Uthman Ibn Hunayf
Sahl Ibn Hunayf
Umar ibn Abi Salama
Hazrat Hamzah
Hazrat Bilal
 Jabir ibn Abdillah Al Ansari
Abu Ayyub Al Ansar
 Hujr ibn Adi
Muhammed ibn Abi Bakr
Yasir ibn Amir [First Matyrs]
 Sumayyah Bint Khayyat [First Matyrs]
Zaid ibn Harith
Usama ibn Zaid
Jaffar ibn Abi Talib [At tayyar]
Aqeel Ibn Abi Talib
Khuzaymah ibn Thabit
Habib ibn Madhair
Sai’d Rabi.
 Khadija bint Khuwalid
Ali ibn Abi Talib
Fatim Binte Muhammed
Hasan ibn Ali
Hussain Ibn Ali
Abbas [uncle]
Umm Salama
Umm Sauda
Umm Zainab
Al Harith ibn Abi Hala
Umm Ayman
Umar ibn Muqrin
Qays ibn Sa’d
Malik ibn Nuwayrah
Kumayl ibn Ziyad
Sa’sa’ ibn Suhan
Fatima bite Assad
Ubay ibn K’ab
Aban B.Sai’d
Abu Barza Al-Aslami
Abul Haytham b. Al Tayyihan
Abu Tufayl
Abu Qutada Al Ansari
Al Bara b.Azib
Instead of just mention of names, I would like to see the Tawtheeq given to them by Shia Rijalists, for all of these mentioned names, even though i'm aware that some of these were graded as thiqa by Shia Rijalists, but I would like to see the tawtheeq for all the names that were presented by the Shia friend.

iceman

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2019, 11:55:58 AM »
I like to know of all the Sahaaba (may Allah be pleased with all of them) whom the Shi'a do not label as either munaafiq, kaafir, or faasiq.

I heard that there are only a few (like around 7).

Who are they and why?

Just to put to rest your misconception and the misunderstanding you're creating. It's not about us disapproving or you approving. It's all about the individual and their character, performance and achievement. It's what they got up to and did. Sahaba disapproved each other. They labelled each other as Kafir or mushrik (disbelievers) and then killed each other. You know the score.

Rationalist

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #7 on: December 12, 2019, 06:59:16 AM »
I like to know of all the Sahaaba (may Allah be pleased with all of them) whom the Shi'a do not label as either munaafiq, kaafir, or faasiq.

I heard that there are only a few (like around 7).



Who are they and why?


Rationalist

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #8 on: December 12, 2019, 07:00:40 AM »
There is this myth that Shia Mulims only approve of a few companions, and malign the rest. The reality is, we view the companions as we do any other large body or group, including companions of previous Prophets of God. In the noble Quran, there is a clear precedent whereby there are groups that are loyal, groups that go astray , groups that are ignorant.

Given the definition of a companion as per Sunni terminology is anyone who had seen, heard or met the Prophet once, the number of technical companions is well over 100,000. Shias generally refrain from making judgement of the majority of these, who were caught up in the confusion and chaos. Is that not what we see today? Powerful people at the top on all sides make decisions and large swathes of the population unfortunately have little power and submit or are swayed?

What we reject however, is the rather uncritical and irrational belief that anyone who saw and heard the Prophet is beyond reproach, condemnation and question, and that we assume only good about them and they are destined paradise if they outwardly die on Islam. We consider this divorced from a realistic view of the companions, and is based on idealism bereft of any good evidence.

However, when it comes to prominent companions, such as notable members of the Muhajiroon and Ansaar, we actually approve of a good number.

Here is a short list, but there are many others:


Abu Dharr
Ammar bin Yassir
Abu Rafi
Ali ibn  Abi Rafi
Abdullah ibn Mas’ud
Abdullah ibn Abbas
Abu Talib
Abu Dujana al ansari
Abu Sai’d Al Khudri
Miqdad Al Aswad
Uthman ibn Madhu’n
Salman Al Farsi
Uthman Ibn Hunayf
Sahl Ibn Hunayf
Umar ibn Abi Salama
Hazrat Hamzah
Hazrat Bilal
 Jabir ibn Abdillah Al Ansari
Abu Ayyub Al Ansar
 Hujr ibn Adi
Muhammed ibn Abi Bakr
Yasir ibn Amir [First Matyrs]
 Sumayyah Bint Khayyat [First Matyrs]
Zaid ibn Harith
Usama ibn Zaid
Jaffar ibn Abi Talib [At tayyar]
Aqeel Ibn Abi Talib
Khuzaymah ibn Thabit
Habib ibn Madhair
Sai’d Rabi.
 Khadija bint Khuwalid
Ali ibn Abi Talib
Fatim Binte Muhammed
Hasan ibn Ali
Hussain Ibn Ali
Abbas [uncle]
Umm Salama
Umm Sauda
Umm Zainab
Al Harith ibn Abi Hala
Umm Ayman
Umar ibn Muqrin
Qays ibn Sa’d
Malik ibn Nuwayrah
Kumayl ibn Ziyad
Sa’sa’ ibn Suhan
Fatima bite Assad
Ubay ibn K’ab
Aban B.Sai’d
Abu Barza Al-Aslami
Abul Haytham b. Al Tayyihan
Abu Tufayl
Abu Qutada Al Ansari
Al Bara b.Azib

Do you have a reference for Abbas and Abu Qutada?

Rationalist

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #9 on: December 12, 2019, 07:06:52 AM »
As for any traditions about everyone apostatizing save a handful, if you are sincere in seeking the truth and the actual position, i highly recommend reading this article:

"Did the Sahaba become Kufaar?": https://www.shiachat.com/forum/blogs/entry/233-did-the-sahaba-become-kafir/

It does a thorough job for anyone who believes discussions should be based on fair, objective standards and not merely desires.

The articles just says they weren't apostates, but those who turned away from waliyah. In the conclusion it says they are doomed for the hell fire.

Adil

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #10 on: December 12, 2019, 08:22:17 AM »
The articles just says they weren't apostates, but those who turned away from waliyah. In the conclusion it says they are doomed for the hell fire.

Perhaps he did not read the article properly. It tries to solve a problem, but as you say, it opens up another can of worms in the conclusion.

iceman

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2019, 08:44:07 PM »
Perhaps he did not read the article properly. It tries to solve a problem, but as you say, it opens up another can of worms in the conclusion.

And which can of worms is that.

Rationalist

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #12 on: December 14, 2019, 07:13:52 AM »
And which can of worms is that.
I expected the article dismiss the hadith. Rather it sugar coats it, and instead says it doesn't say the sahaba became apostates instead they turned away from Waliyah. 

iceman

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #13 on: December 15, 2019, 10:53:34 PM »
I expected the article dismiss the hadith. Rather it sugar coats it, and instead says it doesn't say the sahaba became apostates instead they turned away from Waliyah.

According to the Sunni ideology sahaba can become apostates like Malik bin Nuwayrah and his tribes men. And then they start jumping up and down if Shias think some did. 😑 This is what I call DOUBLE STANDARDS

Rationalist

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #14 on: December 16, 2019, 04:07:54 AM »
According to the Sunni ideology sahaba can become apostates like Malik bin Nuwayrah and his tribes men. And then they start jumping up and down if Shias think some did. 😑 This is what I call DOUBLE STANDARDS

What those Sunnis or Bakris need to learn is that Umar actually had a disagreement with Abi Bakr on this issue. Umar did not agree or support Abi Bakr's decision at for this case. Also, the issue with the article is that it puts the imaan of Ammar ibn Yassir into question saying he delayed his acceptance of the waliyah.

iceman

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #15 on: December 16, 2019, 03:33:46 PM »
What those Sunnis or Bakris need to learn is that Umar actually had a disagreement with Abi Bakr on this issue. Umar did not agree or support Abi Bakr's decision at for this case. Also, the issue with the article is that it puts the imaan of Ammar ibn Yassir into question saying he delayed his acceptance of the waliyah.

"What those Sunnis or Bakris need to learn is that Umar actually had a disagreement with Abi Bakr on this issue. Umar did not agree or support Abi Bakr's decision at for this case"

That is true. I agree with that.

iceman

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #16 on: December 16, 2019, 03:36:03 PM »
Salmaan, Abu Dhar, Miqdaad.

Ammar bin Yasir initially went astray but later 'returned' to Ali according to their fairy tales.

They only like them because they were on the side of Ali during the political tensions. They never saw Ali as some divinely appointed infallible Imam - this concept was alien to them. Ironically, both Salmaan and Ammar were close people to Abubakr and Omar during their Caliphates.  They both acted as their governors and military generals.

He asked the Shia. Are you a shia?

Soccer

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #17 on: March 12, 2020, 11:22:49 PM »
The believers in the beginning were now outnumbered by a people who either ignored the Nabi (s) or fought the Nabi (s).  Imam Ali (a) decided not to go to war, not because, he didn't think he would win or lose, but because it would be seen forever as greed for power when majority didn't want Ali (a) in power. The believers did of course want to help but some of them were apathetic in start, but Fatima (a) reminded them, and they went out to revive the Sunnah peacefully.

Why do you think Uthman got overthrown and people ran to Ali (a). Yes, part of it was corruption of governors, but why to Ali (a) this time.

Endless war of this was not the solution. There probably would be no hadith in praise of Imam Ali (a) left in his opponents, if he fought Abu Bakr. So he spared the believers fighting and they were very few, and the original followers of Mohammad (s) and Ali (a) outnumbered by people clueless about the Sunnah and Quran they spent the most of 23 blessed years of Nubuwa and Quranic tanzil fighting Mohammad (s) in this regard.

I was wiser to wait, and he even warned them,  it would be better for him to remain an advisor for them, and power is not necessary, you can give it to someone else. But they all swore to him they would be sincere in their oaths. Then some broke it and Mauwiya did what he did, and used the propaganda of the hypocrites to make it into an issue of the initial division between Abu Bakr and Ali (a). Although there was this religion dispute about successorship among people, and some people understood Quran and others didn't, followers of Ali (a) were of those who can understand Wilayah of Ali (a) and those who despite sermons of Ali (a) and clarification of the Sunnah from the companions, couldn't understand Quran due to their unjust and oppressive heedless nature.

The original companions as in those who emigrated from Mecca and the ones who were sincerely meeting and then invited Mohammad and Ali (peace be upon them both and their family) to come to Yathrib which then became Madinatal Munuwara were outnumbered.

The original believers were now outnumbered by people who God forgave like the brothers of Joseph but no way are these people immune to turning back on their religion. Perhaps if the will of the Prophet was accepted without division and dispute and he was not poisoned and what occurred didn't occur in that regard, perhaps, mental clarity would have been everlasting till this day.

And Quran shows from the start, in Yathrib, there was always a people who disagreed with giving Mohammad (s) refuge but pretended to have faith. It's not impossible this occurred with some of those who migrated from Mecca to sabotage as this an ancient war between God's forces and believers against Gog and Magog and those who they deceive.

In 4th chapter there is also an allusion to Gog (the one who Satan is the Qareen, not sends a Qareen but is the Qareen) and spending wealth to show off to people before the talk of Christian and Jewish scholars, and the talk of Ahlulbayt of Abraham and Ulil-Amr.

Gog is not out in the open today nor his followers (magog), but he does what he does.  And Suratal Tahreem shows a division about to take place in which Aisha and Hafsa did the right decision then after a wrong decision.

The point, is all this stuff is volatile. Messengers after Moses' did their best, but maybe, followers didn't help enough or enemies were just to sly and deceiving in how they corrupted the Torah and place of Aaron and his family.

God is the best judge in all this, but, the issue of interpretation of holy scripture is always the first dispute. Usually it ends up that the messages are left and then as a result, the original scripture get's distorted.

Somehow the reminder remains and the book, no falsehood comes to it, and we are lucky in this regard that God planned and made the Quran the way it is.

Try to appreciate it and the excuse it gave people to oppose the family of Mohammad like Yacoub gave his sons with the wolf, so they one day return.

Otherwise there be hardly any followers of Quran today and no one would even know of Mohammad and his family.  God has wisdom in his ways. Trust the Quran to clarify and guide, and give a chance of the ahadith of Ahlulbayt of his Nabi to guide you and compliment it and give you insights to it.

This all I ask.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2020, 11:33:45 PM by Soccer »
"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Ebn Hussein

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #18 on: March 13, 2020, 10:57:15 PM »
Fact: Bulk of Muhajirin and Ansar were traitors and kuffar according to Shi'ism as they gave Bay'ah to Abu Bakr first.

Qur'an: Praises those who FOLLOW the foremost of Muhajirs and Ansar (al-Hasan and al-Husayn are neither, there is not a single such verse about Imams).

Conclusion: Islam and the Qur'an are right, Shi'ism is wrong.
الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله
لم أر أحداً من أهل الأهواء أشهد بالزور من الرافضة! - الخطيب في الكفاية والسوطي.

Imam Al-Shafi3i - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah." [narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

iceman

Re: Which Sahaaba are the ones of which the Shi'a approve?
« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2020, 12:31:16 AM »
Fact: Bulk of Muhajirin and Ansar were traitors and kuffar according to Shi'ism as they gave Bay'ah to Abu Bakr first.

Qur'an: Praises those who FOLLOW the foremost of Muhajirs and Ansar (al-Hasan and al-Husayn are neither, there is not a single such verse about Imams).

Conclusion: Islam and the Qur'an are right, Shi'ism is wrong.

"Fact: Bulk of Muhajirin and Ansar were traitors and kuffar according to Shi'ism as they gave Bay'ah to Abu Bakr first"

Nope. That's not what we believe in. We believe the successor to Muhammad s.a.w was already chosen. Lets say the successor wasn't chosen for arguments sake, then still we believe that Saqifa was an unfortunate incident and the selection of Abu Bakr was illegitimate and immature. People didn't gather in Saqifa in large numbers to select a leader. You use numbers were it suits you. Was saqifa a public gathering to select a leader. The answer is a very big NO.

The question is not about bulk of Muhajirin and Ansar giving bay'ah, the bulk also gave bay'ah to Yazeed.

"Qur'an: Praises those who FOLLOW the foremost of Muhajirs and Ansar (al-Hasan and al-Husayn are neither, there is not a single such verse about Imams)"

Qur'an also criticises Muhajir and Ansar. It works both ways. Do you come blind in the eyes the other way. Hassan and Hussain, the verse of Tat'heer and mubahala and the two incidents relating to them apply to Hassan and Hussain. How many Muhajir or Ansar do you see here. You still want to play around. If you still want to I will still corner you. Your kind ain't difficult to handle. You never have been.

There are plenty about third in line in authority after Allah and his Prophet s.a.w. And those third in line are Imams. You need to explain yourself.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
1910 Views
Last post November 12, 2014, 06:36:43 PM
by Ebn Hussein
30 Replies
5320 Views
Last post February 28, 2015, 06:34:25 PM
by Hani
7 Replies
1776 Views
Last post April 19, 2017, 02:10:19 PM
by Zlatan Ibrahimovic
3 Replies
926 Views
Last post August 01, 2016, 10:15:42 PM
by ShiaMan