Reconciliation

In Tareekh Al-Tabari, the events precipitating the Battle of the Camel are recorded. Al-Tabari narrates that a man asked Aisha (رضّى الله عنها): “O mother, what moved you and pushed you to this country?” She answered: “O son, to reconcile between people.” So it was that Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), Talha (رضّى الله عنه), and Zubair (رضّى الله عنه) met Caliph Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to urge him to find the murderers of Uthman (رضّى الله عنه). It should be noted that during Uthman’s Caliphate, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) also went to Uthman (رضّى الله عنه) to urge him to do many things at the behest of the Beduins who opposed Uthman (رضّى الله عنه). Hence, it can be seen that there is nothing wrong in negotiating with the Caliph and urging him to do something, as long as this is done in a peaceful and productive manner; in fact, this prevents bloodshed and violence.

Uthman’s Killers

The murderers of Uthman [the extremist portion of the Shia’t Ali, i.e. Saba’ites] obviously did not want Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) to be successful in convincing Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to prosecute them. “And the people who provoked the murder of Uthman [the Saba’ites] had the worst sleep ever because they came close to be doomed. They were discussing their plight the whole night until they agreed to ignite a war [between Aisha and Ali] in secret. They took that as a secret so that no one would know what evil they were planning. They woke up at dusk and while their neighbors did not feel them; they (the agitators) sneaked to do the dirty job in the darkness … they laid swords in the believers…” [Al-Tabari, vol.3, p.39, year 36H]

“The Saba’ites…who were fearing of peace…started throwing Aisha with lances while she was on her camel…Aisha said: ‘…remember Allah and Judgment Day.’ But the Saba’ites refused anything but to fight. So the first thing Aisha said when the Saba’ites refused to stop was: ‘O people, curse the killers of Uthman and their friends.’” [Musnaf Ibn Abi Sheibah, vol.8, the Book of the “Camel” in the departure of Aisha, p.718] Aisha’s contingent (رضّى الله عنها) then returned fire in order to defend the Prophet’s wife, and soon the matter escalated into an all out conflict.

And so the Battle of the Camel was initiated, not by Ali (رضّى الله عنه) nor by Aisha (رضّى الله عنها); rather it was Uthman’s killers who attacked Aisha’s envoy (رضّى الله عنها) for fear that her negotiation mission would succeed and result in the subsequent capture of those responsible for the death of Uthman (رضّى الله عنه). Ali (رضّى الله عنه), Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), Talha (رضّى الله عنه), and Zubair (رضّى الله عنه) found their contingents fighting each other, not even knowing who fired the first shot; little did they know that it was Uthman’s killers who had initiated this entire operation, hoping that it would cause Aisha’s mission (رضّى الله عنها) of negotiation to fail. The Saba’ites would blame the entire matter on Aisha (رضّى الله عنها), and we see clearly today that their descendants–the Ithna Ashari Shia–have continued this tradition of blaming Aisha (رضّى الله عنها). This is yet another solid link between Abdullah ibn Saba and the modern day Shia, both of which slander the Prophet’s wives and his companions.

now we wonder whether the sabities would show respect to their mother?

Order and decorum please. I have had to modify posts here, next will be bans. Kindly refrain from making offensive posts/comments.

There will be no warnings after this- just action.

Thank you.

^
@ Vedaxcool,

We are not asking you for forged stories by Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi recorded in Tabari,in disrespect to what happened in the Battle of Jamal,Aisha launched,as an escape to cover up for Aisha's treason in fighting the battle against Imam Ali (as),the man regarded as the "fourth rightly guided caliph" by Sunnis.Aisha left Medina all the way to Iraq with an army capable of fighting a battle that cost thousands of lives to do what? For "reconciliation" with who? To "encourage" and "visit" Imam Ali (as) with an army? Please you're smarter than this.try and read more extensively into these issues in Islamic history.you're surely capable of handling details and reports than to be quoting formatted texts and half quotations.even wikipedia gives a better account about the Battle of Jamal than what you're copying.

Aside,we are asking you to provide reference on the stories on Abdullah Ibm Saba,the alleged jewish convert to Islam who started the "Shia sect".provide reference that his alleged father paid for the murder of Umar.Provide reference that Umar's son Ubaydullah killed 2 out of 3 of those who instigated the killing of his father;while "Saba Ibn Shamoon" escaped.then provide reference that Abdullah Ibn Saba,the alleged jewish convert had a role in the killing of Usthman and the Battle of Jamal.my dear Vedaxcool,you will find NOTHING! I will not accuse you of being a liar or a bad person.but you're evidently misled with false stories and your zeal to hold to your "Sunni identity".after we are done with this Abdullah Ibn Saba discussion,you will feel shame that you fell into this trap to copy such an account and throw it at the Shia.

Abdullah Ibn Wahab al-Sabai'ee,the head of the Khawarij, (who fought against Imam Ali (as) and his Shia), and his Sabaites/sabaiyyah clan from Saba',Yemen (who got their name from their clan) should not be mistaken for the fictitious Abdullah Ibn Saba,an alleged jewish convert to Islam who "founded" the "Shia sect" as the enemies of the Shia Muslims propagate to tarnish their history.the term "sabaiyyah" is an ethnic tag and was never a religious or sectarian tag.it is just as we have northerners in Nigeria carrying the name of the area they originate.the mischief to turn the word "sabaiyyah" into a religious tag associating it with a fictitious Abdullah Ibn Saba character only exists in the imagination of people with no historical or hadith sources.

Like we did in the Ashura thread,I don't want you to copy/paste.I want you to read and understand what you've read and then tackle me if you can.

So provide me references on the following,if not admit your ignorance (there is no shame in that) :

1. Provide reference that Umar's son Ubaydullah killed 2 out of 3 of those who instigated the killing of his father;while "Saba Ibn Shamoon" (abdullah ibn saba's father) escaped.

2. then provide reference that Abdullah Ibn Saba,the alleged jewish convert to islam,had a role in the killing of Usthman.

3. Provide reference of abdullah Ibn saba (the person himself as claimed),had a role in the battle of jamal.provide any report of his presence in the battle.

Extensive research into the fictitious character of Abdullah Ibn Saba,and all the imaginary and false claims against the Shia Muslims and Imam Ali (as) about the killing of usthman, the Battle of Jamal and others, invented by Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi, the heretic (according to Sunni scholars) and an Ummayyad mercenary and story teller without any reference or source to his stories.

The research is extensive and very detailed in 5 parts.happy reading as you discover many things in Islamic history!

Part 1
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/1.html

Part 2
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/2.html

Part 3
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/3.html

Part 4
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/4.html

Part 5
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/5.html

^^^

lol! the truth is too hard to stomach, isn't it! Then why ask for it only to start shouting yourself horse. Truly your post is hardly different from the term ignorance and wilful dishonesty, you should know that by now that i don't take you seriously! Next please! even your wikipedia excellent reproduction of the battle clearly says it is disputed Aisha started a rebel army to attack an Ali and disappointingly your wikipedia even tried pinning Uthman Murder on Ali, Auzobillah, and it seems you guys always ally yourself with kafirs! what a pity

^
"Bring forth your proof if you're truthful".

I'm not interested in a personal argument or exchange with you.I simply want you to back up your "Abdullah Ibn Saba" allegations and many accusations and copy/paste claims with references from hadith.very simple but yet impossible!

I'm not interested in accusations,malicious arguments or personal exchanges.I see myself as someone here to help based on what you don't know.I want to help you.if you accept,good.if not its fine.that's my mode of debate.I'm willing to convince you on what I believe,but what you're not trying to convince me.you're fighting to confuse yourself while you should not be convinced and become a Shia.and by Allah,I must admit from my observation on the forum,that you will make a good Shia!you just need to read more,instead of fighting and copying from here and there.

If you want to know the reality and history of the Shia,then ask and you will know from us who we are,starting from the time of the holy Prophet Muhammed (saw) and after his death.the term "Shia" is the only synonym for "Islam".

The Term "Shia" in the Quran and Hadith
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter1b/13.html

The Origin of the Shia
http://www.al-islam.org/the-origins-and-early-development-of-shia-islam-sayyid-jafari/

Allah's warning:

“…and be not amongst those who join gods with Allah, those who split up their Religion, and become shias (sects) - each party rejoicing in that which is with itself.” (Quran, 30:31-32)
The transliteration of the Arabic reads:
“Muneebeena ilayhi waittaqoohu waaqeemoo alssalata wala takoonoo mina almushrikeena. Mina allatheena farraqoo deenahum wakanoo shia [/b]an kullu hizbin bima ladayhim farihoona”

Rafidi could continue to argue with Allah, Allah calls teh believers musllims, Alhamdulilah I am one!

In the Nahjul Balagha, one of the most revered books of the Shia, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) said in Sermon 126:

“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. [b]So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”

These are the three Saheeh (with 7 different sahih isnaads) hadeeth regarding Ibn Saba:

حدثني محمد بن قولويه، قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) يقول و هو يحدث أصحابه بحديث عبد الله بن سبإ و ما ادعى من الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، فقال إنه لما ادعى ذلك فيه استتابه أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فأبى أن يتوب فأحرقه بالنار.

Hishaam bin Salim, who said that he heard it from Imam Aboo `Abd Allaah (AS) when he told that `Abd Allaah bin Saba called (to people) the divinity of Imaam `Alee (AS). Upon that ‘Alee ordered him to repent, but he refused. Then Ali let him burn in fire.”

Now, lets see what al-kashee understood by these sahih hadiths, here is the opinion of shia alim al-kashee regarding ibn saba:

ذكر بعض أهل العلم أن عبد الله بن سبإ كان يهوديا فأسلم و والى عليا (ع) و كان يقول و هو على يهوديته في يوشع بن نون وصي موسى بالغلو فقال في إسلامه بعد وفاة رسول الله (ص) في علي (ع) مثل ذلك و كان أول من شهر بالقول بفرض إمامة علي و أظهر البراءة من أعدائه و كاشف مخالفيه و أكفرهم فمن هاهنا قال من خالف الشيعة أصل التشيع و الرفض مأخوذ من اليهودية.

Some people of knowledge mentioned that Abdullah bin Saba’ was a Jew, who embraced Islam and supported Ali. While he was still a Jew, he used to go to extremism in calling Yousha’ bin Noon as the appointee (successor) of Moses, thus after embracing Islam – after the demise of the Messenger of Allah [pbuh&hf] – he said the like about Ali. It was him who first publicly announced the mandatory Iamamah for Ali, rejected and disowned his enemies, debated his opponents and called them Kafirs. Hence, those who oppose the Shi’ites often say: The Shi’ites and Rejectors (Rafidah) have their roots in Judaism “.

Source: Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 109

and the bad news keep getting worse

^

You obviously don't know what you're copying!

You're still providing un-graded hadiths WITH NO CHAIN OF NARRATORS and based on the stories of Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi who invented the fictitious character of "abdullah ibn saba".

You have still not provided ANY reference regarding:

1. The presence and role of the fictitious character of Abdullah Ibn Saba in the killing of Umar

2. His role in killing Usthman

3. His role and PRESENCE in the battle of Jamal.

You will find NOTHING! give references to the three instances mentioned and validate the historicity of ibn saba.

^^^^

Living in denial or is it so hard to see? I can do many things but i cannot not cure blindness, even your shia scholars provided FACTUAL basis on the very founder of shiasm which is found in the above hadith! Obviously you have no rebuttal how sad, and then what made you ask for it? possibly to live in Denial! Live to deny another day that migt be the new shia motto!

Please provide "factual" basis for the involement of ibn saba in the killing of umar,usthman and the battle of jamal.then show me where Shia scholars in those hadiths you quoted/stated that ibn saba is the "founder of shiism".according to the stories you provided,Imam Ali (as) burnt him for claiming Imam Ali (as) is "god".I am Shia and I don't believe Imam Ali (as) is "god".how do I become a follower of your ibn saba? I want evidence how your ibn saba was "the founder".validate your stories and accusations relating to him.even establishing his existence is not fictitious,is not enough to prove that the accusations you've attached to his name to attack the Shia are true.

The keyword to note is Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi!

vedaxcool: ^^^

lol! the truth is too hard to stomach, isn't it! Then why ask for it only to start shouting yourself horse. Truly your post is hardly different from the term ignorance and wilful dishonesty, you should know that by now that i don't take you seriously! Next please! even your wikipedia excellent reproduction of the battle clearly says it is disputed Aisha started a rebel army to attack an Ali and disappointingly your wikipedia even tried pinning Uthman Murder on Ali, Auzobillah, and it seems you guys always ally yourself with kafirs! what a pity

Now you're lying!

You're even lying on wikipedia.where did wikipedia state Imam Ali (as) is responsible for Usthman's murder?

"The rebels of Egypt began the siege of Uthman Ibn Affan.[4] The rebels refused to provide Uthman with food or water, and kept him imprisoned, hoping to force his abdication.

Role of Ali and Aisha

Ali

Ali intervened only when informed that the rebels were preventing the delivery of water to the besieged caliph.[5] He tried to mitigate the severity of the siege by insisting that Uthman should be allowed water.[6] Ali went to the extent of even sending his own sons to protect Uthman's house when he was in danger of being attacked.[7][8] Rebels protested against it and committed excess therein.[9]

Uthman was murdered provoking the First Fitna.[10]


On Aisha in the Battle of Jamal:

PLEASE COMPARE:


"It has been disputed that Aisha formed a rebel army including Talha and Zubair and went to the city of Basra to seek vengeance for Uthman's blood, which was the beginning of the second civil war in Islam. The sunni mainstream view is that an independent army went to kill Ali and Aisha left with a small group of people to inform him herself.

AND-NOW PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT THE BELOW AND SEE NOTHING BUT EITHER MENTAL RETARDATION OR SHAMEFUL DISHONESTY BASED ON SUNNI DENIAL AND DETAILS DRIBBLING:


"On learning of the advance of the rebels, Ali set out to meet them...

Led by Zubair and Talha (Aisha's cousin and commander), the rebels marched out to meet Ali's army.

In the war, Aisha accompanied the rebel army in her camel-litter.[21] Professor Leila Ahmed claims that it was during this engagement that Muslims fought Muslims for the first time.[22] Battle ensued and Aisha's forces were defeated. Aisha directed her forces from a howdah on the back of a camel; this 656 AD battle is therefore called the Battle of the Camel".




End of the battle

Marwan ibn al-Hakam shot his own general,[24]Talha (Aisha's cousin and commander), who became disabled in the leg by the shot, and carried into Basra, where he died later of his wound.[25][26][27] Marwan said,


'By God, now I will not have to search for the man who murdered Uthman'.[28]

Ali's forces overcame the rebels, and the defeated army was treated with generosity. Ali met Aisha, who was at that time aged 45, with the intent of reconciliation. He sent her back to Medina under military escort headed by her brother Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr, one of Ali's commanders. She subsequently retired to Medina with no more interference with the affairs of state.[29]

vedaxcool: Allah's warning:

“…and be not amongst those who join gods with Allah, those who split up their Religion, and become shias (sects) - each party rejoicing in that which is with itself.” (Quran, 30:31-32)
The transliteration of the Arabic reads:
“Muneebeena ilayhi waittaqoohu waaqeemoo alssalata wala takoonoo mina almushrikeena. Mina allatheena farraqoo deenahum wakanoo shia [/b]an kullu hizbin bima ladayhim farihoona”

Rafidi could continue to argue with Allah, Allah calls teh believers musllims, Alhamdulilah I am one!

In the Nahjul Balagha, one of the most revered books of the Shia, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) said in Sermon 126:

“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. [b]So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”

stop misquoting,misinterpreting and twisting words of our Imam (as).

In the days of Imam Ali (as) and in the time of the kharijites or khawarij,there were 3 groups of people:
1.those who hated Imam Ali (as) like the kharijites and the Nasibis like banu umayya who denied him many things.for example,Muawiya another hero of the sunnis who vedaxcool would bless and say 'may Allah be pleased with him' whenever Muawiya is mentioned,hated Imam Ali (as).Muawiya made sure that Imam Ali (as) was cursed from the pulpits and in mosques during friday sermons for 40years until Umar Ibn Abdul-aziz stopped the practice.presently and in modern times,sunnis do not hate Imam Ali (as) because times have changed and they cannot afford to hate him.but they still honor those who hated Imam Ali (as) and fought him like aisha and muawiya and co.this is either misguidance,hypocrisy or ignorance.the views of overwhelming number of shia scholars is that sunnis are misguided and many of them are victims of fabrication and a distorted history thanks to their tyrannical and oppressive caliphs who hated Imam Ali (as).

2.the second group are those who in the name of so called love who attributed divinity to Imam Ali (as) like Ibn Saba.

3.the third group include the shia who neither hate nor over-love Ali (as).we give him the honor due to him.also in this group,in the time Imam Ali (as) was talkin,was the majority of people who did not hate Imam Ali (as) and did not also over-love him.they actually loved Ali (as).in the words of the Prophet (s):'love for Ali is faith'.the third group is the middle course.

Naturally and islamically,anyone who over-love someone to attribute divinity to a human being is doomed.also hating a pious believer and someone like Imam Ali (as) is sinful and can lead to damnation.the middle course is best.but does it also mean those there would automatically attain paradise?no,because you have avoided hating and over loving Imam Ali (as) and taken yourself from automatic damnation of 2 groups but As for those in the middle course you must also be rightly guided.among those in the middle course who love Imam Ali (as),it is the shia who are rightly guided and follow the absolute truth and correct interpretations and the ultimate reality of Islam.just saying 'i love Ali' with your mouth like those who also love and honor the enemies of Imam Ali (a),or even truly loving Imam Ali (as) while you dont give him due regards and honor like the shia give him,would still leave you lacking.

Rafidi :
Extensive research into the fictitious character of Abdullah Ibn Saba,and all the imaginary and false claims against the Shia Muslims and Imam Ali (as) about the killing of usthman, the Battle of Jamal and others, invented by Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi, the heretic (according to Sunni scholars) and an Ummayyad mercenary and story teller without any reference or source to his stories.

The research is extensive and very detailed in 5 parts.happy reading as you discover many things in Islamic history!

Part 1
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/1.html

Part 2
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/2.html

Part 3
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/3.html

Part 4
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/4.html

Part 5
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter10/5.html

Jazak Allahu Khairan!

And the topic of this thread still remains inspite of running away from it to avoid it: AISHA!

Lest I forget,what did the Prophet (s) say about her? How did he describe her?

Rafidi :

Please provide "factual" basis for the involement of ibn saba in the killing of umar,usthman and the battle of jamal.then show me where Shia scholars in those hadiths you quoted/stated that ibn saba is the "founder of shiism".according to the stories you provided,Imam Ali (as) burnt him for claiming Imam Ali (as) is "god".I am Shia and I don't believe Imam Ali (as) is "god".how do I become a follower of your ibn saba? I want evidence how your ibn saba was "the founder".validate your stories and accusations relating to him.even establishing his existence is not fictitious,is not enough to prove that the accusations you've attached to his name to attack the Shia are true.

The keyword to note is Saif Ibn Umar al-Tamimi!

did you miss this?

vedaxcool: These are the three Saheeh (with 7 different sahih isnaads) hadeeth regarding Ibn Saba:

حدثني محمد بن قولويه، قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) يقول و هو يحدث أصحابه بحديث عبد الله بن سبإ و ما ادعى من الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، فقال إنه لما ادعى ذلك فيه استتابه أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فأبى أن يتوب فأحرقه بالنار.

Hishaam bin Salim, who said that he heard it from Imam Aboo `Abd Allaah (AS) when he told that `Abd Allaah bin Saba called (to people) the divinity of Imaam `Alee (AS). Upon that ‘Alee ordered him to repent, but he refused. Then Ali let him burn in fire.”

Now, lets see what al-kashee understood by these sahih hadiths, here is the opinion of shia alim al-kashee regarding ibn saba:

ذكر بعض أهل العلم أن عبد الله بن سبإ كان يهوديا فأسلم و والى عليا (ع) و كان يقول و هو على يهوديته في يوشع بن نون وصي موسى بالغلو فقال في إسلامه بعد وفاة رسول الله (ص) في علي (ع) مثل ذلك و كان أول من شهر بالقول بفرض إمامة علي و أظهر البراءة من أعدائه و كاشف مخالفيه و أكفرهم فمن هاهنا قال من خالف الشيعة أصل التشيع و الرفض مأخوذ من اليهودية.

Some people of knowledge mentioned that Abdullah bin Saba’ was a Jew, who embraced Islam and supported Ali. While he was still a Jew, he used to go to extremism in calling Yousha’ bin Noon as the appointee (successor) of Moses, thus after embracing Islam – after the demise of the Messenger of Allah [pbuh&hf] – he said the like about Ali. [size=18pt]It was him who first publicly announced the mandatory Iamamah for Ali[/size], rejected and disowned his enemies, debated his opponents and called them Kafirs. Hence, those who oppose the Shi’ites often say: The Shi’ites and Rejectors (Rafidah) have their roots in Judaism “.

Source: Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 109

and the bad news keep getting worse

And the topic of this thread still remains inspite of running away from it to avoid it: AISHA!

Lest I forget,what did the Prophet (s) say about her? How did he describe her?

Zhul-Fiqar.:
And the topic of this thread still remains inspite of running away from it to avoid it: AISHA!

Lest I forget,what did the Prophet (s) say about her? How did he describe her?

Narrated Abu Musa:
Allah's Apostle said, "Many amongst men reached (the level of) perfection but none amongst the women reached this level except Asia, Pharaoh's wife, and Mary, the daughter of 'Imran. And no doubt, the superiority of 'Aisha to other women is like the superiority of Tharid (i.e. a meat and bread dish) to other meals."
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/055-sbt.php#004.055.623

wow only fool would insist on slandering her don't you think?

vedaxcool:

did you miss this?

Not at all!

But my mistake was thinking you understand what you read.

Now, lets see what al-kashee understood by these sahih hadiths, here is the opinion of shia alim al-kashee regarding ibn saba:

ذكر بعض أهل العلم أن عبد الله بن سبإ كان يهوديا فأسلم و والى عليا (ع) و كان يقول و هو على يهوديته في يوشع بن نون وصي موسى بالغلو فقال في إسلامه بعد وفاة رسول الله (ص) في علي (ع) مثل ذلك و كان أول من شهر بالقول بفرض إمامة علي و أظهر البراءة من أعدائه و كاشف مخالفيه و أكفرهم فمن هاهنا قال من خالف الشيعة أصل التشيع و الرفض مأخوذ من اليهودية.

Some people of knowledge mentioned that Abdullah bin Saba’ was a Jew, who embraced Islam and supported Ali. While he was still a Jew, he used to go to extremism in calling Yousha’ bin Noon as the appointee (successor) of Moses, thus after embracing Islam – after the demise of the Messenger of Allah [pbuh&hf] – he said the like about Ali. It was him who first publicly announced the mandatory Iamamah for Ali, rejected and disowned his enemies, debated his opponents and called them Kafirs. Hence, those who oppose the Shi’ites often say: The Shi’ites and Rejectors (Rafidah) have their roots in Judaism “.

Source: Al-Kashee, Rijaal, pg. 109

and the bad news keep getting worse

You're happy a Shia scholar is amusing us by reporting what a minority among Sunnis were spreading from the tales of saif ibn umar al tamimi.

Did you read these parts:

"Some people of knowledge mentioned"

"Hence, those who oppose the Shi’ites often say: The Shi’ites and Rejectors (Rafidah) have their roots in Judaism".

So if I,a Shia, report that : a Sunni "scholar" on nairaland mention that ibn saba was a jew who embraced islam and supported Imam Ali (as),and was the first to believe in the imamate of Imam Ali (as) as he believed in the imamate of Prophet Joshua (as) after Prophet Moses (as).so the opponents of the Shia are claiming that (we) the Shia have roots in judaism".

how does the above constitute "proof" that Ibn Saba is the "founder" of what I believe in or make the above that I am the stating ibn saba to be the "founder" when I'm only recording what others about us (Shia)? The above doesn't even prove the historical existence of ibn saba.

vedaxcool: These are the three Saheeh (with 7 different sahih isnaads) hadeeth regarding Ibn Saba:

حدثني محمد بن قولويه، قال حدثني سعد بن عبد الله، قال حدثنا يعقوب بن يزيد و محمد بن عيسى، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، قال : سمعت أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) يقول و هو يحدث أصحابه بحديث عبد الله بن سبإ و ما ادعى من الربوبية في أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، فقال إنه لما ادعى ذلك فيه استتابه أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فأبى أن يتوب فأحرقه بالنار.

Hishaam bin Salim, who said that he heard it from Imam Aboo `Abd Allaah (AS) when he told that `Abd Allaah bin Saba called (to people) the divinity of Imaam `Alee (AS). Upon that ‘Alee ordered him to repent, but he refused. Then Ali let him burn in fire.”

So how does the above validate your accusations,even assuming that ibn saba is an historical figure? He believed Imam Ali (a) is a "god",and he got punished.how does the above make him the "founder of shiism"?

With the event of Ghadir Khumm,the hadith of manzila,the event of saqifa banu saeda,the incident of fadak,the Quranic verse of wilayah,the Quranic verse of mawaddah,Quranic verse of ulil-amr,the hadith of twelve imams,hadith of imam of the time and many more found in the Quran and authentic/undisputed sunni hadiths,if any jewish convert or even a hindu,clinged to them,that convert is more Muslim than any Sunni.if I as a Shia can validate all our beliefs in the Quran and authentic hadiths,then you can call me (not only a jew but) even a zionist jew.even at that I'd be more muslim than any liar calling himself "Sunni"

Yet still assuming ibn saba existed at all,and was really punished by Imam Ali (a) for making him "god" as reported in hadiths without grade,then that is totally different from the tales invented by saif ibn umar al-tamimi,that makes him the "founder of shiism" by coining the stories of his involvement starting with the killing of umar,then usthman and up to the battle of jamal.there is no historical source proving these allegations to sort of promote ibn saba as a "cult leader" of troublemakers,and his sect is the Shia,who undisputed evidence record as the followers of Imam Ali (as) and the Ahlul-Bayt (as).it is even insulting to think that Imam Ali (as) was condoning the activities of a jew and a following just to "consolidate" his power as your article earlier alleged.there is no historical evidence to back up the accusations attached to ibn saba on major events.therefore he is a fictitious figure and not historical.assuming,the hadith claiming he was burnt alive for making Imam Ali (a) "god" was not coined as reaction to the invention of ibn saba and the accusations attached to him from umar's killing to the battle of jamal, by saif ibn umar,and thus inventing him as "the founder",there is nothing in history to back his mere presence.not even when he appeared and was "burnt" are recorded and established.nothing!and if this man ever existed,he was far too insignificant and worthless to have being "the founder" of any sect.if indeed he embraced Shia beliefs,then if those beliefs are what we Shia Muslims believe in,then he simply adopted what to this day we can validate and support in any debate, from the Quran and hadiths.

^^^

you can't have it both ways either your shias statments are true or not, or you simply live to deny another day,

vedaxcool:

Narrated Abu Musa:
Allah's Apostle said, "Many amongst men reached (the level of) perfection but none amongst the women reached this level except Asia, Pharaoh's wife, and Mary, the daughter of 'Imran. And no doubt, the superiority of 'Aisha to other women is like the superiority of Tharid (i.e. a meat and bread dish) to other meals."
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/055-sbt.php#004.055.623

wow only fool would insist on slandering her don't you think?

Who is this "Abu Musa"? Is he another of the fake "prophets" alongside the likes of umar that sunnis honor their words,more than the words of Prophet Muhammed (s)? Or may be abu musa was one of the beneficiaries of the Sunni doctrine of "adult brea$tfeeding",established you know by who!

You expect me to accept Mr. Abu Musa's praise on Aisha and to reject the Prophet's (s) words of condemnation on her that are quoted below?

Rafidi :
[size=14pt] SHOCKER! SHOCKER !! SHOCKER !!! [/size]

1. Ammar Ibn Yasir (RA) said to people before the battle of Camel that:

"Allah has put you to test whether you obey Allah or her (Aisha)." (See Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Tradition 9.220).

2. Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.336
Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: "Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here," saying three times, "from where the side of the Satan's head comes out."

3. Muslim has related in his Sahih from Ikrima Ibn Ammar from Salim from Ibn Umar who said:

"The Prophet of Allah (PBUH&HF) emerged from the house of Aisha and said. 'The head of disbelief is from here, where the horns of Satan will rise.'"

Sunni reference: Sahih Muslim, Arabic version, the Chapter of Seditions, v4, p2229

vedaxcool: ^^^

you can't have it both ways either your shias statments are true or not, or you simply live to deny another day,

Very very funny!

Anyways,I hope these encounters would be used as opportunity to increase your knowledge and to read more and find out more.I would really like you to read the five part research I earlier presented links to.you will really enjoy the reading.

I'm looking forward to having you soonest as one of our nairaland ayatollahs,along with LagosShia.

Salam,Peace! ( Note: not "shalom",we Shia are not jews )

just like their kafir pal saint paris they telling simple truth seems swallow huge bolders of rock.

1. Volume 9, Book 88, Number 220:

Narrated Abu Maryam Abdullah bin Ziyad Al-Aasadi:

When Talha, AzZubair and 'Aisha moved to Basra, 'Ali sent 'Ammar bin Yasir and Hasan bin 'Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. Al-Hasan bin 'Ali was at the top of the pulpit and 'Ammar was below Al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard 'Ammar saying, "'Aisha has moved to Al-Busra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her ('Aisha)."

we see how the nasibis half quote a hadith to misrepresent history! by Allah the horn of satan emerged from the east!
what is more funny Ammir has become zhulfiqar prophet that he now attributes words of Ammir to Muhammaa pbuh!


Golden quote:

vedaxcool:

Narrated Abu Musa:
Allah's Apostle said, "Many amongst men reached (the level of) perfection but none amongst the women reached this level except Asia, Pharaoh's wife, and Mary, the daughter of 'Imran. And no doubt, the superiority of 'Aisha to other women is like the superiority of Tharid (i.e. a meat and bread dish) to other meals."
http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/bukhari/055-sbt.php#004.055.623

wow only fool would insist on slandering her don't you think?

Rafidhi, it is a pity you could not recognise your master's and ayatollah manners behind zhul fiqar!

vedaxcool: 1. Volume 9, Book 88, Number 220:

Narrated Abu Maryam Abdullah bin Ziyad Al-Aasadi:

When Talha, AzZubair and 'Aisha moved to Basra, 'Ali sent 'Ammar bin Yasir and Hasan bin 'Ali who came to us at Kufa and ascended the pulpit. Al-Hasan bin 'Ali was at the top of the pulpit and 'Ammar was below Al-Hasan. We all gathered before him. I heard 'Ammar saying, "'Aisha has moved to Al-Busra. By Allah! She is the wife of your Prophet in this world and in the Hereafter. But Allah has put you to test whether you obey Him (Allah) or her ('Aisha)."

we see how the nasibis half quote a hadith to misrepresent history! by Allah the horn of satan emerged from the east!
what is more funny Ammir has become zhulfiqar prophet that he now attributes words of Ammir to Muhammaa pbuh!


Golden quote:



Rafidhi, it is a pity you could not recognise your master's and ayatollah manners behind zhul fiqar!

first its Ammar (Ibn Yasser),not "Ammir".Ammar (RA) was a sahabi.and you could clearly see the hadith is narrated by him and made up of his words.it is clear enough for you to read,right? and the other two hadiths are from the Prophet (s).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1r-Y8abt_c8

failure must be very hard to bear especially if a certain better things disgraced you in your own wahabism exposed thread!

vedaxcool: failure must be very hard to bear especially if a certain better things disgraced you in your own wahabism exposed thread!

the link (so we can see by ourselves) :
https://www.nairaland.com/1140610/wahhabism-exposed

And the pains continues . . .

Holy Quran 43:78
"Certainly We have brought you the truth, but most of you are averse to the truth".

Holy Quran 17:81
"And say: The truth has come and the falsehood has vanished; surely falsehood is a vanishing (thing).”

The following verse was revealed threatening Aisha and Hafsa with divorce.Allah (swt) also states that He can give the Prophet (sa) BETTER wives than Aisha and Hafsa as replacement.Allah (swt) also states the qualities which the replacement will have.let us examine the verse:

Holy Quran 66:5
It may be, if he divorced you, that Allah will give him in exchange wives better than you,- who submit (muslims), who believe (mu'minaat), who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility), who travel (for Faith) and fast,- previously married or virgins.

In the above verse Allah (swt) tells Aisha and Hafsa that He can give the Prophet (sa) with BETTER wives to replace them.He went on to state how the replacement wives would be better:


1. They are Muslims
2. They are belivers
3. They are devout
4. They are repentant
5. They are sincere worshippers
6. They fast and travel for the sake of the religion

If the above qualities make the foreseen replacement Allah (swt) is talking about BETTER than Aisha and Hafsa,then has it occur to any one sincere person here,that Aisha and Hafsa must lack the above qualities before those who possess such qualities can be seen as BETTER? Lacking the above qualities therefore means possession of the opposite.for instance,if you are not a Muslim,you are a kaffir;if you are not a believer (mu'min),you are a munafiq (hypocrite).

These are things which LagosShia did not invent or made up to deserve a ban of 3 months.you are not a better Muslim and follower of Muhammad (sa) than LagosShia.what you who banned LagosShia and those who supported the ban have done,is to silence the word of God because of biase and heroin worship and blind fanaticism/sentiments.you have denied the word of Allah (swt).if you think that a 3 month or 3 year ban would stop me from both spreading the truth and defending myself,you're mistaken.in one post,I have done here through common sense what pages did not do (because of fanaticism and injustice and biase),through simple evidence present in the holy Quran.I'm back and be very sure you cannot silence me and you cannot silence these facts I have put forward herein in simple terms.if I don't defend myself,its because I choose not to.but I'm here and I have stated facts on Aisha and Hafsa for the sincere and godfearing who do not deny the word of Allah (swt),and have common sense,which is not common!

And I will both appeal to and warn the moderators not to hide or tamper with this post.I must be able to express my views freely and defend myself.if not,this post (a copy of which I have) will resound heavily in the entire forum.

SALAM!

^LOL. I think it is time your case is reported to the Iranian Ayatollahs. They should know how to respond to you.

#Typical