Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Do it for the bantz.


    Or think rationally and become an atheist. Join us... we have tea and biscuits. :cookie:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shazy2014)
    Hello
    I'm thinking of becoming Shia because I believe in the ahlebait and the should have been leadership of Ali and Hussein
    But I would just like to know anything else that I should know like general knowledge on how Shias are different
    Can anyone help me out?
    Assalamualaikum and Ramadan and early Eid Mubarak! Lol😉

    There is no validity in the argument that Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA) disapproved or had amger towards the first 3 Khalifs. This is fabricated and has no place in Islam! If so, then why did Ali call his son Abu Bakr, a man he was supposedly against?

    Follow the Prophet (SAW), his companions (in particular the first FOUR Caliphs!) and the generation after that and the generation after that. Insha'Allah, may Allah guide you to the path of the Salaf as Salih, and the Qur'an and Sunnah.👍
    Offline

    15
    Salaam

    Ok honestly I am someone who does not approve of sects, but having said I have come to realise it is important to differenciate oneself from those that hold beliefs that do not align with yours.

    I did not know about shiasm and in fact that I hold the views of sunni sect lol. As I was just following the Quran and Sunnah I believe. But I rather someone call me and know by the name Muslim than a sect first and foremost.

    Now I actually have a friend who is a shia and I respect a brother on tsr Tawheed who I know is also a shia.

    However, when I researched about its belief, background etc, my heart could not follow it tbh. One of the biggest reasons I can't ever be called a shia perhaps is mainly because I truly love, respect the sahabas (Ali RA, Umar RA, Abu Bakar RA and Uthman RA) and would never see myself dissociating from them. Even my friend said this, she was like one can not truly be a shia then.

    However, I know some shias that call themselves shias but do not hold these beliefs....which is strange according to shias themselves eg my friend. Hence, I can not judge and Allah only has the right. Shiasm itself has many groups I believe that differ slightly from one another.

    I pray for all the Muslims and non-Muslims that may Allah guide them to the right path and to protect the Muslims from any innovation in Islam (bidah). Ameen.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrincessBO$$)
    Shia's whip themselves on Ashura. So............................


    Grand Ayatullah Khamenei


    Ayatullah Khamenei, in his position as the Hakim Al-Shari’i has given a Hukm forbidding blood flagellation. A hukm is binding on all Muslims, unlike a fatwa.


    Question 1450:
    Is hitting oneself with swords halal if it is done in secret? Or is your fatwa in this regard universal?

    Answer:
    In addition to the fact that it is not held in the common view as manifestations of mourning and grief and it has no precedent at the lifetime of the Imams (a.s.) and even after that and we have not received any tradition quoted from the Infallibles (a.s.) about any support for this act, be it privately or publicly, this practice would, at the present time, give others a bad image of our school of thought. Therefore, there is no way that it can be considered permissible.


    Question 1449:
    In commemorating the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a.s.) on the tenth of Muharram, some people hit themselves with a machete, or walk bare-footed on fire. Such actions defame Shi‘ism and put it in a bad light, if not undermine it. They cause bodily and spiritual harms on these doing it as well. What is your opinion in this matter?

    Answer:
    Any practice that causes bodily harm, or leads to defaming the faith, is haram. Accordingly, the believers have to steer clear of it. There is no doubt that many of these practices besmirch the image of Ahlul Bayt’s (a.s.) School of Thought which is the worst damage and loss.




    Ayatullah Mutahhari





    “Blood matam in its present form does not have a rational or religious basis. It is a clear instance of deviation. At least, in the present day it causes Shi’ism to be questioned. Activities that do not have any relation to the goals of Imam Husayn (a) are razors, blades and locks. Striking the head with a blade is the same. This is a mistake. Some people take blades and strike their heads making blood flow – for what? This action is not mourning.”

    Howzah va Ruhaniyat, v.3

    In his book “Al Malahama Al-Husainiya”, Ayatullah Mutahhari adopts Ayatullah Muhsin Al-Amin’s opnion.




    Grand Ayatullah Khomeini




    “In his name, the Most High. Do not perform blood matam or the likes in the present state. If it does not include forbidden actions or defamation of the religion than there is no problem.

    Istifta’at Imam, v.3, miscellaneous questions, question 37.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shazy2014)
    Hello
    I'm thinking of becoming Shia because I believe in the ahlebait and the should have been leadership of Ali and Hussein
    But I would just like to know anything else that I should know like general knowledge on how Shias are different
    Can anyone help me out?
    The Shias rejected Abu Bakr RA being fairly elected by the current Muslim community as the new caliph after our prophet pbuh passed away because they believed in family succession and wanted Ali RA to be the successor.

    Personally, I don't think the Shias did the right thing there. From that point onwards many Muslims have been killed to this current day, due to the birth of shia ideology. Ali RA himself did not even propose to want to become a caliph until a few rebel Muslims forced it upon him after they killed the 4th elected caliph
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Salamunalaykum my dear brother. I am assuming you are a sunni muslim, and so i hope Ramadhan has gone well for you, and that Allah (azwj) accepts the good you have done, and shows you mercy, and guides you and guides me.

    (Original post by mercuryman)
    The Shias rejected Abu Bakr RA being fairly elected by the current Muslim community as the new caliph after our prophet pbuh passed away because they believed in family succession and wanted Ali RA to be the successor.
    I am a shia muslim, and i would like to say that this is a misconception. Firstly, the election of Hazrat Abu Bakr was not a fair one. It took place in Saqifah, and the vast majority of muslims had no say, and were not present. Indeed, at Saqifah according to Saheeh Al Bukhari, the minority of Ansar who gathered there wanted to choose a leader among themselves, and for a while rejected Abu Bakr's choice, Umar, and another companion. There was chaos, there was fighting, there was shouting, and in that chaos - something happened- and the result was the result.

    The majority of muslims had no say, and we find, for six whole months, only until the death of his wife, Fatima a.s, Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s, opposed Hazrat Abu Bakr.

    Saheeh Al Bukhari

    "She(Fatima) forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life. She lived for six months after the death of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). When she died, her husband. 'Ali b. Abu Talib, buried her at night. He did not inform Abu Bakr about her death and offered the funeral prayer over her himself. During the lifetime of Fatima, 'All received (special) regard from the people. After she had died, he felt estrangement in the faces of the people towards him. So he sought to make peace with Abu Bakr and offer his allegiance to him. He had not yet owed allegiance to him as Caliph during these months."

    Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Messenger"
    http://sunnah.com/bukhari/57/2


    As Hz. Umar states: "`Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us,"
    http://sunnah.com/bukhari/86/57
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h333)
    x
    Dear sister, salamunalaykum,

    Despite holding disagrements on these issues, i am so happy to see we can get along, we can discuss these issues with each other in a manner where we show respect, tolerance, and kindness.

    May Allah azwj accept the good deeds and have mercy of the muslims, and guide us all unto truth , Ilahiameen.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shazy2014)
    Hello
    I'm thinking of becoming Shia because I believe in the ahlebait and the should have been leadership of Ali and Hussein
    But I would just like to know anything else that I should know like general knowledge on how Shias are different
    Can anyone help me out?
    1. Shia muslims believe in One God. They believe Almighty God is not composed of constituent parts, such as the shin, hands, feet, [ even if one claims they are nothing like ours]. We affirm God almighty is one, in his absolute oneness, not numerically one, but one in the sense one can not divide his essence into constituent parts like the scenario given. We believe God almighty will never be seen in this life, or the next. We believe there is nothing 'to see' - God does not have a form, a confine, a contingent existence by which one can comprehend him , see him, and visualize him.



    2. Shia muslims believe that Muhammed s.a.w, the greatest creation, the greatest man to walk this earth, was the last and final prophet of God, the seal. We believe his Sunnah, and his example is what we absolutely strive to follow. We believe Rasullah s.a.w clearly stated, in both sunni and shia books, that in order to follow his Sunnah, one must hold onto the Quran AND the Ahlulbayt:

    It is narrated in Sahih Muslim as well as many other sources that:
    Someday (after his last pilgrimage) the Messenger of Allah (S) stood to give us a speech beside a pond which is known as Khum (Ghadir Khum) which is located between Mecca and Medina. Then he praised Allah and reminded Him, and then said: "O’ people! Behold! It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. Behold! I am leaving for you two precious things. First of them is the book of Allah in which there is light and guidance...The other one is my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. (three times)."• Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v 4, p1873, Tradition #36.
    3. Shia muslims believe that the Quran is the last and final revelation of God. The Quran we have in content is the preserved Quran with no alteration in its verses and the Quran has not undergone corruption.Any ahadith in shia and sunni works which give that impression are often weak, or wrongly interpreted. And this is the Ijma of shia scholars.

    4.Shia muslims respect many companions of Muhammed s.a.w. However, we view the companions of Muhammed s.a.w in the same way and light as the Quran views them. There are those loyal, those of varying levels of belief, those who do not possess true belief in their hearts, as some examples. We do not regard the sahaba in the view that they were all good and righteous. Rather, we look at them as any large body and group of human beings. Similar to all the other Prophets of God, From Jesus a.s to Moses a.s, in any large body or group of people, there are those who are loyal, those who have faith in varying levels, those who change, those who turn back, those who are not sincere.

    We revere the matyrs of the Holy Wars, such as the matyr's of Badr r.a, among the others. We revere many notable companions - four of whom are in the top ten narrators of sunni hadith books. They are, Jabir ibn Abdullah r.a, Abu said al khudri r.a, Ibn Abbas r.a, Abdullah ibn Mas'ud r.a. vWe revere many more notable companions.




    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mercuryman)
    The Shias rejected Abu Bakr RA being fairly elected by the current Muslim community as the new caliph after our prophet pbuh passed away because they believed in family succession and wanted Ali RA to be the successor.
    This is not true. The reason why we adhere to the ahlulbayt asws of Muhammed s.a.w is not because we believe in family succession and thus want Ali ibn abi talib a.s to be the leader after.

    We believe Rasullah s.a.w clearly appointed Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s, and clearly told us to follow two weighty things, the Quran, and the Ahlulbayt a.s. We believe in following the ahlulbayt a.s not due to believing in family succession, but because it was a command of the Prophet Muhammed s.a.w, and thus a command of Allah azwj. We believe that Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s should have led after him because it was Muhammed s.a.w who had chosen and appointed him, by command of Allah azwj.

    It is narrated in Sahih Muslim as well as many other sources that:
    Someday (after his last pilgrimage) the Messenger of Allah (S) stood to give us a speech beside a pond which is known as Khum (Ghadir Khum) which is located between Mecca and Medina. Then he praised Allah and reminded Him, and then said: "O’ people! Behold! It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call.

    Behold! I am leaving for you two precious things. First of them is the book of Allah in which there is light and guidance...The other one is my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. (three times)."•

    Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v 4, p1873, Tradition #36.






    "When the Messenger of Allah (saw) returned from the farewell pilgrimage and stopped at Ghadeer Khum, he said: "It's as if I have received a call and I answered it - and that I am leaving among you two weighty things with one being greater than the other - the book of Allah and the progeny of my Ahlulbayt (as), so look at how they will be left with you after me. Verily they will not separate from each other until they reach me at the Lake-fount".

    Then he said: "Verily Allah is my Mawla (master), and I am the Mawla of every believer". Then he grabbed the hands of 'Ali and said: "So whomsoever I am his Mawla then 'Ali is his Mawla. O Allah, support those who support him and oppose those who oppose him". Then I asked Zayd: Did you hear it from Allah's messenger? He answered: There was no one there who did not see and hear it with their eyes and ears. [Khasa'is Amir al-Mu'mineen, al-Nasa'i, page 96]
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shazy2014)
    x
    Time only permits me to answer some of the issues brother Zamestaneh has raised. I hope this is of benefit to you and to users in general.

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    - Hadith of 12 Caliphs after the Prophet SAW - Did not refer to the Ahlul Bayt, and to refer to them would be greatly beyond the text of the hadith
    No shia argues [or should argue] purely based on this hadith, that there are twelve Imams , and that it therefore proves shia Islam. The proof of Shia Islam is based on more solid groundwork, clear ahadith, and clear argumentation. This hadith is thus used only after affirming the clear, for anyone seeking truth to recognise that, despite distortion of ahadith, there was some truth that remained, and some reference to a truth.

    - Hadith of the two weighty things - The Hadith does not instruct Muslims to take their deen and leadership solely from the Ahlul Bayt, rather to be mindful and respectful.
    You know, whenever i ask my brothers in the ahlus-sunnah about this, i often get different replies. On the i-soc thread itself, a few brothers admitted it means following the Sunnah of the Prophet s.a.w as preserved by the ahlulbayt. It's really important to understand that these are your intepretations of these matters - and not what the matters are. So let us examine the hadith:

    It is narrated in Sahih Muslim as well as many other sources that:
    Someday (after his last pilgrimage) the Messenger of Allah (S) stood to give us a speech beside a pond which is known as Khum (Ghadir Khum) which is located between Mecca and Medina. Then he praised Allah and reminded Him, and then said: "O’ people! Behold! It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call.

    Behold! I am leaving for you two precious things. First of them is the book of Allah in which there is light and guidance...The other one is my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. (three times)."•

    Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v 4, p1873, Tradition #36.


    Important points:

    1. The context of the hadith is important. Muhammed s.a.w knows he will soon die, and has this one chance to tell the people of the important things to latch onto after him, in a sense, it is an ultimatum.

    2. Muhammed s.a.w clearly states he is leaving behind two precious things, two things of vital importance. This denotes that whatever it is Muhammed s.a.w is leaving must have enormous benefit to the muslims, and must be of immense importance. The muslims must be able to truly benefit from these two things - and as Muhammed s.a.w himself is about to die, these are the two things he is leaving behind for his people thus, to latch onto.

    3. The first of them is the Quran, and the second is the Ahlulbayt a.s. You see, Muhammed s.a.w places the Ahlulbayt a.s next to the Quran as two precious things muslims must hold onto for guidance after his death. As the Quran is a form of guidance, so too is what he places next to it.

    4. Not just once, but three times does he tell the people about the Ahlulbayt a.s


    For any truth-seeking individual, they must objectively analyse this hadith and ask themselves, given the context, the way the words are are arranged, the manner in which things are said, does it really only mean to look after the Ahlulbayt a.s , and be good to them ? Does it not clearly mean, after the death of Muhammed s.a.w, in the vacuum that then ensues, he is commanding the Ummah to latch onto two precious things, two forms of guidance, two weighty things that will be of enormous benefit, and not merely a matter of 'just look after my family' ?

    We find that you have many sheikhs in the ahlus-sunnah who also agree with me on this, and would disagree with you, i highly recommend you to watch this video of a sheikh from the ahlus-sunnah:







    - Ali RA named his child after his 'enemy' (according to Shia) Abu Bakr which does not make sense.
    Abu Bakr is a Qunyah , note a name. No-one names their child Abu Bakr, and Abu Bakr's father did not even name his child Abu Bakr himself. The son of Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s who was given the Qunyah 'Abu Bakr' - a very famous and common Qunyah at that time (there were many, many 'Abu Bakr's) does not mean Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s named his son that.


    With regards to actual naming of other sons I can name my child George , for example, a very common name in the UK (i know i wouldn't, but this is for illustration). Am i naming him after George Bush?



    - The hadith of Fatimah whoever angers Fatimah angers the Prophet SAW - This hadith was ironically stated when Ali RA expressed a desire to marry the daughter of Abu Lahab (the hated kafir uncle if the Prophet SAW), so do Shia believe Ali is hated by the Prophet SAW? Ofc they don't, so they are inconsistent.
    This argument does not really hold. We reject that Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s angered Fatima a.s. We also do not need that hadith you speak of to prove that angering Fatima a.s is like Angering Rasulullah s.a.w. It would be the case even if that hadith was not accepted, as we find many ahadith about the love Rasulullah s.a.w had for Fatima a.s

    However, for sake of argument lets say that did happen. Once can argue that Fatima a.s would have forgiven Ali ibn abi talib a.s and quickly gotten over it in a matter of days, if not weeks.

    As for Hazrat Abu Bakr, not only did Fatima a.s get angry with him, she stopped speaking to him until she died, died angry with him, and was buried secretly at night. This is all contained in Saheeh Al Bukhari:

    Saheeh Al Bukhari

    "She(Fatima) forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life. She lived for six months after the death of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). When she died, her husband. 'Ali b. Abu Talib, buried her at night. He did not inform Abu Bakr about her death and offered the funeral prayer over her himself. During the lifetime of Fatima, 'All received (special) regard from the people. After she had died, he felt estrangement in the faces of the people towards him. So he sought to make peace with Abu Bakr and offer his allegiance to him. He had not yet owed allegiance to him as Caliph during these months."

    Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Messenger"
    http://sunnah.com/bukhari/57/2



    - There were no chains of narration for Naghul Balagha - an 'authentic' Shia collection of sermons by Ali RA during his caliphate. It is a staple book for Shia but does not meet even basic hadith standards, having a disconnected chain of narrators by a few hundred years.
    This shows , with due respect, a lack of understanding about nahjul balagha, and shia books in general.

    Firstly, nahjul balagha is not regarded as saheeh or an 'authentic' collection of sermons. Secondly, while the chains of the individual sermons and narrations are not contained in the book, many of the narrations, sermons, do have chains and these chains are found in other sources, and other classical shia books of hadith.

    A number of the narrations and sermons are even agreed upon by the ahlus-sunnah, and are taken from sunni sources, and used by sunni's in their own historical works and books

    Furthermore, nahjul balagha does not rank in our top four books of ahadith. They are Al Kafi, manyaradul faqih, etc.

    Eitherway, it is a wonderful book, it has its place and position, each sermon and narration and hadith is examined not just by isnaad (which we can find for many) but also matn - content, among many other factors.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Salamunalaykum brother , Eid Mubarak in advance, may Allah azwj accept the good deeds you and the muslims in our Ummah have done in this holy month and guide you and guide me,

    (Original post by King7)

    There is no validity in the argument that Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA) disapproved or had amger towards the first 3 Khalifs. This is fabricated and has no place in Islam! If so, then why did Ali call his son Abu Bakr, a man he was supposedly against?
    Abu Bakr is not a name you give, it is a Qunyah, a title. Even Abu Bakr's real name was not Abu Bakr. Furthermore, in those days, there were many, many famous Abu Bakr's, and it was a common Qunyah/title.

    With regards to dissaproval and anger, i quote Saheeh Al Bukhari:

    Saheeh Al Bukhari

    "She(Fatima) forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life. She lived for six months after the death of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). When she died, her husband. 'Ali b. Abu Talib, buried her at night. He did not inform Abu Bakr about her death and offered the funeral prayer over her himself. During the lifetime of Fatima, 'All received (special) regard from the people. After she had died, he felt estrangement in the faces of the people towards him. So he sought to make peace with Abu Bakr and offer his allegiance to him. He had not yet owed allegiance to him as Caliph during these months."

    Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Messenger"
    http://sunnah.com/bukhari/57/2
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    Salamunalaykum brother , Eid Mubarak in advance, may Allah azwj accept the good deeds you and the muslims in our Ummah have done in this holy month and guide you and guide me,



    Abu Bakr is not a name you give, it is a Qunyah, a title. Even Abu Bakr's real name was not Abu Bakr. Furthermore, in those days, there were many, many famous Abu Bakr's, and it was a common Qunyah/title.
    Wa alaikum al salaam. Eid mubarak to you too bro
    Are you saying he wasn;t named abu bakar?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Al-farhan)
    Wa alaikum al salaam. Eid mubarak to you too bro
    Are you saying he wasn;t named abu bakar?
    It seems as though he had the Qunya of Abu Bakr. But if you look into the custom of the time, Abu Bakr was a common Qunya, and it was not something the father necessarily named the child, but a title that child developed.

    Abu Bakr's real name isn't Abu Bakr - correct? By real name, the name his father gave him, not the Qunya.

    Ali ibn abi talib a.s would not have named his son 'Abu Bakr', it's a Qunya, not a name.

    I can name my son Abdullah, but he can later [in those days] be given the Qunya of Abu bakr by the people.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    Time only permits me to answer some of the issues brother Zamestaneh has raised. I hope this is of benefit to you and to users in general.



    No shia argues [or should argue] purely based on this hadith, that there are twelve Imams , and that it therefore proves shia Islam. The proof of Shia Islam is based on more solid groundwork, clear ahadith, and clear argumentation. This hadith is thus used only after affirming the clear, for anyone seeking truth to recognise that, despite distortion of ahadith, there was some truth that remained, and some reference to a truth.



    You know, whenever i ask my brothers in the ahlus-sunnah about this, i often get different replies. On the i-soc thread itself, a few brothers admitted it means following the Sunnah of the Prophet s.a.w as preserved by the ahlulbayt. It's really important to understand that these are your intepretations of these matters - and not what the matters are. So let us examine the hadith:

    It is narrated in Sahih Muslim as well as many other sources that:
    Someday (after his last pilgrimage) the Messenger of Allah (S) stood to give us a speech beside a pond which is known as Khum (Ghadir Khum) which is located between Mecca and Medina. Then he praised Allah and reminded Him, and then said: "O’ people! Behold! It seems the time approached when I shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call.

    Behold! I am leaving for you two precious things. First of them is the book of Allah in which there is light and guidance...The other one is my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. (three times)."•

    Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of ‘Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v 4, p1873, Tradition #36.


    Important points:

    1. The context of the hadith is important. Muhammed s.a.w knows he will soon die, and has this one chance to tell the people of the important things to latch onto after him, in a sense, it is an ultimatum.

    2. Muhammed s.a.w clearly states he is leaving behind two precious things, two things of vital importance. This denotes that whatever it is Muhammed s.a.w is leaving must have enormous benefit to the muslims, and must be of immense importance. The muslims must be able to truly benefit from these two things - and as Muhammed s.a.w himself is about to die, these are the two things he is leaving behind for his people thus, to latch onto.

    3. The first of them is the Quran, and the second is the Ahlulbayt a.s. You see, Muhammed s.a.w places the Ahlulbayt a.s next to the Quran as two precious things muslims must hold onto for guidance after his death. As the Quran is a form of guidance, so too is what he places next to it.

    4. Not just once, but three times does he tell the people about the Ahlulbayt a.s


    For any truth-seeking individual, they must objectively analyse this hadith and ask themselves, given the context, the way the words are are arranged, the manner in which things are said, does it really only mean to look after the Ahlulbayt a.s , and be good to them ? Does it not clearly mean, after the death of Muhammed s.a.w, in the vacuum that then ensues, he is commanding the Ummah to latch onto two precious things, two forms of guidance, two weighty things that will be of enormous benefit, and not merely a matter of 'just look after my family' ?

    We find that you have many sheikhs in the ahlus-sunnah who also agree with me on this, and would disagree with you, i highly recommend you to watch this video of a sheikh from the ahlus-sunnah:









    Abu Bakr is a Qunyah , note a name. No-one names their child Abu Bakr, and Abu Bakr's father did not even name his child Abu Bakr himself. The son of Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s who was given the Qunyah 'Abu Bakr' - a very famous and common Qunyah at that time (there were many, many 'Abu Bakr's) does not mean Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s named his son that.


    With regards to actual naming of other sons I can name my child George , for example, a very common name in the UK (i know i wouldn't, but this is for illustration). Am i naming him after George Bush?





    This argument does not really hold. We reject that Ali ibn Abi Talib a.s angered Fatima a.s. We also do not need that hadith you speak of to prove that angering Fatima a.s is like Angering Rasulullah s.a.w. It would be the case even if that hadith was not accepted, as we find many ahadith about the love Rasulullah s.a.w had for Fatima a.s

    However, for sake of argument lets say that did happen. Once can argue that Fatima a.s would have forgiven Ali ibn abi talib a.s and quickly gotten over it in a matter of days, if not weeks.

    As for Hazrat Abu Bakr, not only did Fatima a.s get angry with him, she stopped speaking to him until she died, died angry with him, and was buried secretly at night. This is all contained in Saheeh Al Bukhari:

    Saheeh Al Bukhari

    "She(Fatima) forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life. She lived for six months after the death of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). When she died, her husband. 'Ali b. Abu Talib, buried her at night. He did not inform Abu Bakr about her death and offered the funeral prayer over her himself. During the lifetime of Fatima, 'All received (special) regard from the people. After she had died, he felt estrangement in the faces of the people towards him. So he sought to make peace with Abu Bakr and offer his allegiance to him. He had not yet owed allegiance to him as Caliph during these months."

    Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Messenger"
    http://sunnah.com/bukhari/57/2





    This shows , with due respect, a lack of understanding about nahjul balagha, and shia books in general.

    Firstly, nahjul balagha is not regarded as saheeh or an 'authentic' collection of sermons. Secondly, while the chains of the individual sermons and narrations are not contained in the book, many of the narrations, sermons, do have chains and these chains are found in other sources, and other classical shia books of hadith.

    A number of the narrations and sermons are even agreed upon by the ahlus-sunnah, and are taken from sunni sources, and used by sunni's in their own historical works and books

    Furthermore, nahjul balagha does not rank in our top four books of ahadith. They are Al Kafi, manyaradul faqih, etc.

    Eitherway, it is a wonderful book, it has its place and position, each sermon and narration and hadith is examined not just by isnaad (which we can find for many) but also matn - content, among many other factors.
    Thank you for the lengthy response - I will respond to it fully when I get home InshaAllah.

    In the meantime, could you provide a more complete reference to the hadith starting "She forsook him....".

    Also could you please demonstrate that the kunya Abu Bakr was common amongst the people? I do appreciate that might be difficult since there were no statistics of names and nicknames back then, but perhaps you could show me examples of multiple Abu Bakrs during the time of the Prophet (SAW), before the time of the Prophetic call, and very soon after?

    A side point: could you please explain how Al Kafi is considered one of the top hadith books for Shia? I can understand not every hadith would be authentic, as the author of Al Kafi didn't intend it to be a collection of Sahih, but it troubles me that a 'top' book of hadith would only be made up of something like 50% authentic hadith (there was a stastic I read somewhere given by a Shia scholar but I will find the reference for that later maybe).

    BarakAllahu feek
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    It seems as though he had the Qunya of Abu Bakr. But if you look into the custom of the time, Abu Bakr was a common Qunya, and it was not something the father necessarily named the child, but a title that child developed.

    Abu Bakr's real name isn't Abu Bakr - correct? By real name, the name his father gave him, not the Qunya.

    Ali ibn abi talib a.s would not have named his son 'Abu Bakr', it's a Qunya, not a name.

    I can name my son Abdullah, but he can later [in those days] be given the Qunya of Abu bakr by the people.
    It was a kunya but later on developed into a name.
    So my question still stands, and I'd appreciate any references of his name.
    ps: if it is a kunya then it is even worse (how can offspring of the infallible develop the characteristics of a fallible usurper)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I would advise fellow Muslims that, although it can be interesting to debate things like sects etc, it might not be wise as we are relying mainly on google/hand picked articles, various lecture video's etc that we can find to support our argument. Unless you are subject matter experts, please do give thought as, are you really qualified to try change someones mind on their faith choice, or even tell them they are wrong.Hope I don't come across as hostile, it isn't at all my intention. I just think we too often end up in debates (be it sunni/shia, hanafi/shaafi, salafi/wahabi, those who reject hadiths, those who follow specific groups etc) which it is almost disrespectful to participate in due to lack of knowledge.

    The truth is, every sect or belief has a valid opinion based on interpretation of 'evidences' (note I use the word evidences, not facts) and people will naturally follow what they personally feel is adequate evidence. If a Sunni decides to seek more knowledge about Shi'aism (and vice versa) sincerely, I am sure they will go to the right places or people and form a conclusion. Every opinion and argument has a counter opinion and argument so you may just end up in circles.

    And Allah knows best. (for the record, I am a Sunni)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tawheed)
    Salamunalaykum brother , Eid Mubarak in advance, may Allah azwj accept the good deeds you and the muslims in our Ummah have done in this holy month and guide you and guide me,



    Abu Bakr is not a name you give, it is a Qunyah, a title. Even Abu Bakr's real name was not Abu Bakr. Furthermore, in those days, there were many, many famous Abu Bakr's, and it was a common Qunyah/title.

    With regards to dissaproval and anger, i quote Saheeh Al Bukhari:

    Saheeh Al Bukhari

    "She(Fatima) forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life. She lived for six months after the death of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). When she died, her husband. 'Ali b. Abu Talib, buried her at night. He did not inform Abu Bakr about her death and offered the funeral prayer over her himself. During the lifetime of Fatima, 'All received (special) regard from the people. After she had died, he felt estrangement in the faces of the people towards him. So he sought to make peace with Abu Bakr and offer his allegiance to him. He had not yet owed allegiance to him as Caliph during these months."

    Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) got angry and stopped speaking to Abu Bakr, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. Fatima remained alive for six months after the death of Allah's Messenger"
    http://sunnah.com/bukhari/57/2

    I know that Abu Bakr was a Qunyah, but after the death of Abu Bakr (RA), it is used as a name.

    Secondly, having dissaproval towards the Sahaba, let alone the forst 4 Caliphs, is an act against the Prophet (SAW). Obey Allah and obey his Rasool (SAW) and the Muslim leaders.

    “When Fatima became ill, Abu Bakr came to her and asked for permission to enter. So Ali said, ‘O Fatima, this is Abu Bakr asking for permission to enter.’ She answerd, ‘Do you want me to give him permission?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ So she allowed him (to enter), and he came in seeking her pleasure, so he told her: ‘By Allah, I only left my home and property and my family seeking the pleasure of Allah and His Messenger and you, O Ahlel Bayt.’ So he talked to her until she was pleased with him.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi, vol 6, page 301)
    https://islamistruth.wordpress.com/2...-vs-falsehood/
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zamestaneh)

    As a revert to Islam, I have tried to look at both sides with fairness (and I am continuing to try to learn), though granted my initial insight into Islam was from a Sunni perspective, I am still progressively concluding that the foundation of Shia beliefs to be a mixture of textual gymnastics to twist hadith and history to support their belief, fabricated lies (e.g. Umar - a beloved friend of the Prophet SAW whose daughter was married to him - caused Fatimah RA to misscarry a baby), and just really an appeal to emotions over logic and truth. If you look at the state of Shi'ism today, it doesn't take long to see that it is comprised of innovation and fanciful tales of the Ahlul Bayt attempting to secretly preserve Islam under persecution; Sunnis respect the Ahlul Bayt but there is no logical reason to prove why our deen is defined by them (or rather what was attributed to them in their name by extreme Shia living in hiding from persecution). If you look at Shi'ism today can you really honestly tell me that the way they practice Islam is how the Prophet SAW practiced it, and how the first generation of Muslims practiced it and believed it?
    Could you please state which innovations are present today?

    What about this "bidah" (note: I am not stating it's bidah of my own accord, rather quoting from the hadith below)

    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    '...Abdur Rahman bin 'Abdul Qari said, "I went out in the company of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab one night in Ramadan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying alone or a man praying with a little group behind him. So, 'Umar said, 'In my opinion I would better collect these (people) under the leadership of one Qari (Reciter) (i.e. let them pray in congregation!)'. So, he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubai bin Ka'b. Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that, 'Umar remarked, 'What an excellent Bid'a (i.e. innovation in religion) this is; ..."

    Volume 3, Book 32, Number 227- Sahih Bukhari
    Very interesting indeed.

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    Hadith of 12 Caliphs after the Prophet SAW - Did not refer to the Ahlul Bayt, and to refer to them would be greatly beyond the text of the hadith.
    Correct, the Prophet did not mention ahlulbayt, this is often used with another hadith. The notion of 12 leaders is derived from here and instances in the Quran i.e Prophet Musa

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    Hadith of the two weighty things - The Hadith does not instruct Muslims to take their deen and leadership solely from the Ahlul Bayt, rather to be mindful and respectful.
    He instructed the Muslims to hold onto the Quran and Ahlulbayt (repeated this 3 times), and if you do, you will never go astray.

    I can't see where the Prophet said to be mindful. The respectful part comes from a verse in the Quran, not this hadith. (Tell them, I ask nothing from you except love for my relatives/kin)

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    Hadith of Ali is your Mawla - Does not refer to Ali RA being the leader of the Muslims, and contrary to Shia beliefs this was not done in the presence of the majority of the Ummah, rather it was after an incident involving the Muslim army on their way back from Yemen.
    I will refer back to this soon, as the Prophet recited a verse prior to this which indicated otherwise. I'll find the verse soon.

    Just to point out though, what is your justification for all the people who heard saying : 'Baqqin Baqqin Ya Ali' (Congratulations, Congratulations of Ali)

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    Hadith of the Pen - Did not indicate that the Sahabah (or Umar RA) prevented the Prophet SAW from writing Ali RA was his successor, and as Shia claim that Ali had already be publically declaired as the successor, this wouldn't make sense.
    This hadith denotes how Hazrat Umar apparently disobeyed the Holy Prophet just before he was about to die, and angered him to an extent that the Prophet ordered them to leave. Consequently causing the very narrator of this hadith to cry profusely when recalling this hadith.

    Also, please read 4:59 from the Quran (Obey God, Obey the Prophet...)

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    The incident of choosing the Caliph - There is no authentic Sunni OR SHIA hadith which indicate that Umar RA caused Fatimah RA (the daughter of the Prophet SAW) to miscarry, and also history books do not even testify that she was pregnant at the time.
    I haven't heard about Hazrat Umar doing that. I will research this though.

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    Ali RA named his child after his 'enemy' (according to Shia) Abu Bakr which does not make sense.
    Abu Bakr isn't really classified as an enemy of Hazrat Ali in my opinion.

    Should have named his son Abu Bakr's actual name, rather an a Qunya if he wanted to purely name after Abu Bakr.

    (Original post by Zamestaneh)
    The hadith of Fatimah whoever angers Fatimah angers the Prophet SAW - This hadith was ironically stated when Ali RA expressed a desire to marry the daughter of Abu Lahab (the hated kafir uncle if the Prophet SAW), so do Shia believe Ali is hated by the Prophet SAW? Ofc they don't, so they are inconsistent.
    This hadith denotes that Hazrat Fatimah was angered by the first caliph, and used alongside another hadith mentioning that the Prophet saying whoever angers Fatimah, angers me.

    I hope I haven't said anything incorrect or hurtful.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrincessBO$$)
    Shia's whip themselves on Ashura. So............................
    That's the same as me saying that Sunnis blow themselves up. Don't go around pushing those labels, there's a set of extremists to everything in life.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by King7)
    Secondly, having dissaproval towards the Sahaba, let alone the forst 4 Caliphs, is an act against the Prophet (SAW). Obey Allah and obey his Rasool (SAW) and the Muslim leaders.
    I know this is for Brother Tawheed but I would like to comment to just this point quickly.

    So do you take the ones who are "vested with authority" from Quran 4:59, to be the Muslim Khalifahs? I also assume that you're aware of the fact that when it states "minkum" in the verse, this is present tense, thus a Muslim Khalifa, who we have to obey, has to always be present.

    I have therefore have three questions:

    1. Who do we have to follow today then (modern society)?
    2. Do you therefore take Yazeed as one of the leaders that the verse states to obey after the Prophet? Did the people of his time have to obey him?
    3. Do you believe in the hadith in Sahih Muslim about the Holy Prophet saying ' I leave 2 weighty things, for if you follow them, you will never go astray. The book of Allah, and my Ahlulbayt (said this part 3 times)?

    That is all.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 2, 2018
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.